2016 (7) TMI 1039

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....is registered, without appreciating that the date of agreement has to be considered as the date of purchase. 2. During hearing the ld. DR, defended the addition made by the ld. Assessing Officer taxing the long term capital gains of Rs. 74,77,895/- and disallowing claimed exemption u/s 54 of the Act. On the other hand, the ld. counsel for the assessee, defended the order of the First Appellate Authority by placing reliance upon the decision in Smt. Sundar Kaur Sujan Sing Gadh (205) 3 SOT 206 (Mum.) order dated 27/02/2005, Purshottam Govind Bhai vs ITO (1985) 13 ITD 939 (Bom.), CIT vs Beena K. Jain (1994) 75 taxman 145 (Bom.), Vinod Kumar Jain vs CIT (2010) 195 taxman 174 (P & H) and CIT vs R. L. Sood (2000) 245 ITR 227 (Del.). 2.1. We hav....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....g the procedure by the builder and handing over the possession to the purchase did not change the date of purchase. We note that the old flat was purchased on 31/05/2001 for Rs. 21,38,860/- and sold on 01/09/2008 for Rs. 1,04,00,000/-. The date of agreement of the flat under construction was 09/08/2006, whereas the possession of the constructed property was taken on 08/01/2009 (as per letter from M/s K. Raheja Universal Pvt. Ltd.) at the cost of Rs. 1,02,13,685/-. The factual matrix was duly examined by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) and he has justifiably place reliance upon the decision in CIT vs H.K. Kapoor (1998) 234 ITR 753(All.), CIT vs J.R. Subramanya Bhatt (1987) 165 ITR 571 (Kar.). The assessee entered into an agreemen....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....apital gain of Rs. 24,05,050/-. The assessee entered into an agreement dated 04/09/1985 for purchase of a flat for Rs. 12,26,751/- and the sale was registered on 27/10/1985. The assessee paid consideration amount on 29/07/1988 and got the possession of the flat on 30/07/1988. The assessee claimed benefit of exemption u/s 54 of the Act. The Hon'ble High Court, after considering the fact, held that the date of possession is the relevant date for the premises instead of date of agreement and date of registration. Identically Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in Vinod Kumar Jain vs CIT (2010) 195 taxman 174 decided in favour of the assessee. The ratio laid down in CIT vs R.L. Sood (245 ITR 227)(Del.) and Smt. Shashi Sharma vs CIT (224 ITR 106....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ting in respect of the new asset any capital gain arising from its transfer within a period of three years of its purchase or construction, as the case may be, the cost shall be nil; or (ii) if the amount of the capital gain is equal to or less than the cost of the new asset, the capital gain shall not be charged under section 45; and for the purpose of computing in respect of the new asset any capital gain arising from its transfer within a period of three years of its purchase or construction, as the case may be, the cost shall be reduced by the amount of the capital gain. (2) The amount of the capital gain which is not appropriated by the assessee towards the purchase of the new asset made within one year before the date on which the....