TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (2) TMI 510
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....law, has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,44,14,836/- made by the AO on account of Long Term Capital Gain. 2. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter vary andy / or withdraw any or all the above grounds of appeal. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee case was selected for scrutiny through CASS and notice u/s 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as the Act) was issued and served upon the assessee requiring him to furnish necessary details and documents along with supporting evidence. In response the assessee attended himself and submitted necessary details and documents in support of his return-of income. On 11/11/2011 the assessee sold a property Fiat No. 1101, Block:No.5, Uniwo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ied upon the order passed by the AO and reiterated the contentions raised by the Revenue in the grounds of appeal. 5. On the other hand, Ld. Counsel of the Assessee relied upon the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and reiterated the contentions made before the Ld. CIT(A). He further stated that since the Ld. CIT(A) has passed a well reasoned order, the same does not need any interference. Hence, he requested that the appeal of the Revenue may be dismissed. 6. We have heard both the parties and perused the relevant records available with us, especially the orders of the revenue authorities. We find that Ld. CIT(A) has discussed the issue in dispute elaborately at page no. 8 to 11 vide para nos. 4 & 5 of the impugned order. For the sake of conve....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ate of agreement was 02/12/2010 when the 'Buyer Builder Agreement' was signed by the appellant. Considering the date i.e. 27/10/2010 as the date of purchase, the AO concluded that the purchase of new flat was made prior to one year from the date of sale of the long term capital asset. As such, claim of assessee for deduction u/s. 54 of the Act was rejected by the AO treating it the case of purchase of residential property rather than construction house. In this regard, the AO relied on Circular No. 471 & 672 concluding that the acquisition of flat from the private builder cannot be treated at part with that of flat from DDA and other institutions and, therefore, rejected the claim of the assessee. In this regard, reference is made t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ments were to be made in installments and the possession was to be handed over after construction and it was pleaded that this case was that of construction of new residential house and not purchase. According to the assessee this position has been clarified by the CBDT in Circular No.672 dated 16/12/1993 in which. it was clarified that acquisition of flat through allotment by DDA was to be treated as construction of flat would apply to cooperative societies and other institutions. The most, important point of consideration is whether purchase of flat from the private builders would fall in the categories of "Other Institutions" as has been held by various courts in following judgments as cited and relied upon the assessee as under....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l High Court] has held that the purchase of property in multi storey building amounts to construction of building within the meaning of sec.54(1) for the purpose of claiming of exemption. I have carefully considered rival contentions, facts of the case and provisions of income tax laws and also various circulars issued by CBDT from time to time and judgements delivered by competent courts on this issue and I am of the view that booking of flat with the builder has to be treated as construction of flat by the assessee and hence period of three years would apply for construction of new house from the date of transfer of long term capital asset. As such exemption u/s 54 by the assessee is allowable. In the present case flat booked wit....