TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (10) TMI 1068
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Appeals) on account of the assessee's claim for exemption of Rs. 34,59,538 under section 54EC of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on investment made in NHAI bonds. 2. The assessee in the present case is an individual who filed her return of income for the year under consideration on August 28, 2008, declaring total income of Rs. 51,560. The said return was originally accepted by the Assessing Officer under section 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently, it came to the notice of the Assessing Officer that the assessee had derived long term capital gain of Rs. 84,59,538 from sale of her new office premises on February 14, 2008 and the same was claimed to be exempt under section 54EC of the Act on the ground that investment of Rs. 85 lakhs was made in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....come-tax (Appeals) confirmed the said disallowance made by the Assessing Officer for the following reasons given in paragraph 5.5 of his impugned order : "5.5 I have perused the assessment order, remand report, submis sions of the appellant, relevant provisions of the Act and also the various judicial pronouncements on the issue. I find that it is a debatable issue and incidentally no direct decision of jurisdiction the hon'ble Bombay High Court, or even any Bench of the hon'ble Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai, is available on the issue. As regards to the appellant's contention that the decisions of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal are b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....le on record. As submitted by learned counsel for the assessee, the issue involved in the appeal of the assessee is squarely covered by various decisions of the Tribunal. In one of such decisions rendered in the case of Aspi Ginwala, Shree Ram Engg. and Mfg Industries v. Asst. CIT (I. T. A. No. 3226/Ahd/2011, dated March 30, 2012) [2012] 52 SOT 16 (Ahd), the Ahmedabad Bench of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal held that the provision of section 54EC makes it clear that where the assessee transfers it capital asset after the 30th September of the financial year, he gets an opportunity to make an investment of Rs. 50 lakhs each in two different financial years and is able to claim exemption up to Rs. 1 crore under section 54EC of the Act. The....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... CIT v. Raj Kumar Jain and Sons (HUF) (I. T. A. No. 648/JP/2011, order dated January 31, 2012) [2012] 20 ITR (Trib) 212 (Jaipur) is in favour of the Revenue on this issue. However, as rightly submitted by learned counsel for the assessee, the said decision of the Jaipur Bench of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has already been considered by the Bangalore Bench of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in its decision rendered in the case of Vivek Jairazbhoy v. Dy. CIT (I. T. A. No. 236/Bang/2012, dated December 14, 2012) wherein the Tribunal followed the decision of the Ahmedabad Bench of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in the case of Aspi Ginwala, Shree Ram Engg. and Mfg Industries [2012] 52 SOT 16 (Ahd) keeping in view the Central Board of....