2018 (1) TMI 986

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of capital gain. 3. Rival contentions have been heard and record perused. 4. Facts in brief are that the assessee filed his Return of Income for the A.Y 2012-13 wherein long term capital gains arising on Sale of Industrial Gala amounting to Rs. 63,97,196/- was reported on the Sale Consideration of Rs. 75,00,000/-. Against the said long term capital gains, the assessee acquired two residential flats namely a) Mayur Shrishti for - Rs. 38,03010/-and b) Shanti Gardens for Rs. 37,73,590/- comprising two agreements. The flat at Shanti Gardens is just one as shown in the plan placed at pages 208-209, annexed as part of the original agreements. Accordingly, the investment from the sale of the Industrial gala has been made in two flats, the co....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the date of transfer of the original asset, then exemption u/s. 54F(1) of the I.T. Act, is not available. 6. Now, assessee is in appeal before us against the above order of CIT(A). 7. It was argued by learned AR that the assessee in furtherance to the object of buying a house property for the family bought two residential properties, deduction u/s 54F would still be allowable having due regard to: (i) the amendment which took effect from 1-4-2015, which specifically made the deduction applicable to purchase of one ,residential house only w.e.f. A.Y. 2015-16. This meant that the Parliament had recognized / accepted the fact that prior to the said date, the benefits of the deduction under section 54F were available for investment in ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Court in the case of CIT vs. Late Khoobchand M. Makhija order dated 18/12/2013 wherein Hon'ble Court held as under:- 16. In the instant case, one residential house is sold. Out of the sale consideration, it was open to the assessee to purchase a big residential house so as to accommodate both his sons, in which event in terms of Section 54 (1), he would have been entitled to the benefit of the said Section. However, instead of purchasing one big house, having regard to the fact that both his sons are grown up, have families and in order to see that in future there won't be any litigation or disharmony, he chose to purchase two small residential houses to accommodate both his sons. 17. It is clear that the assessee was....