TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (5) TMI 1373
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sed substantial grounds that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the findings of the Assessing Officer on denial of exemption u/s.54F of the Act as Rs. 36,00,000/- was not deposited in capital gains account scheme before due date u/sec. 139(1) of the Act. 3. The Brief facts of the case that the assessee is an individual and having income from salary, long term capital gains and interest income and filed return of income on 03.11.2011 disclosing total income of Rs. 5,72,246/- The return of income was processed u/s.143(1) of the Act, subsequently, the notice u/s.143(2) and 142(1) of the Act are issued. In compliance to notices, the ld. Authorised Representative of the assessee appeared from time to time and filed det....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed confirmation from builder. The Assessing Officer alleged that assessee has invested in the construction of property Rs. 30,00,000/- before due date of filing return and violated conditions of Sec. 54F by not depositing the remaining in capital gain account scheme and restricted exemption u/sec. 54F of the Act to the extent of investment of Rs. 30,00,000/- and disallowed long term capital gains Rs. 32,91,672/- alongwith other disallowance and passed assessment order u/s.143(3) of the Act on 28.03.2014. Aggrieved by the order, the assessee filed an appeal before Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). 4. In the appellate proceedings, the ld. Authorised Representative of assessee argued on the grounds and substantiated his arguments with the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n before due date of filing of return of income u/s.139(1) of the Act or invested in the capital gain accounts scheme and relied on the orders of the lower authorities and pleaded for dismissal of appeal. 7. We heard the rival submissions, perused the material on record and judicial decisions cited. The ld. Authorised Representative contention that the assessee is an employee and due date of filing of return applicable for the assessment year 2011-12 is 31.07.2011. The assessee has sold the property and invested in purchase of residential flat as per builder agreement entered on 03.02.2011. The assessee has paid Rs. 30,00,000/- before 31.07.2011 as per the evidence produced by builder in letter dated 18.02.2014 and remaining amount paid in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....al gain the same proportion as the cost of the new asset bears to the net consideration, shall not be charged under section 45: [Provided that nothing contained in this sub-section shall apply where-- (a) the assessee,-- (i) owns more than one residential house, other than the new asset, on the date of transfer of the original asset; or (ii) purchases any residential house, other than the new asset, within a period of one year after the date of transfer of the original asset; or (iii) constructs any residential house, other than the new asset, within a period of three years after the date of transfer of the original asset; and (b) the income from such residential house, other than the one residential house owned on the date of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... due date u/s.139(4) of the Act. The assessee has direct investment in house property and therefore not opted capital gain account scheme. The ld. Authorised Representative further substantiated arguments with judicial decision of Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. R.L. Sood 245 ITR 727 (Del) were the date of agreement to purchase should be taken as the date of purchase. On applying the ratio to current circumstances, the assessee entered into agreement with builder for undivided share of land and construction agreement on 03.02.2011 which is very much before provisions of Sec. 139(4) of the Act. In the case of Jagtar Singh Chawla of Punjab and Haryana High Court in ITA No.71 of 2012, dated 20.03.2013 the assessee has paid substantial ....