2001 (7) TMI 38

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ent if the legal title to the property vests with the assessee? 2. Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that notwithstanding the fact that the sale price of the shares was not actually invested in the house property, the assessee would got exemption under section 54F since the house property was registered in her name within two years from the date of the sale of the shares? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on a proper interpretation of section 54F, the Tribunal was right in law in upholding the assessee's claim to relief under section 54F on the ground that all the conditions of the section were satisfied?" The assessment year in hand is 1987-88. During the course of assessment, the Assessing ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....received only Rs.10,22,789. On September 30, 1986, she purchased a residential house property for a consideration of Rs.25 lakhs and deed was executed and registered. But actually she used the sale proceeds to the tune of Rs.5,21,279 for purchase of stamps, Rs.4,75,000 was paid to the seller on October 8, 1986 and Rs.21,667 was paid to the seller on December 26, 1986, Rs.43,334 was paid to the seller on October 24, 1987. The case of the Assessing Officer was that as she has not actually utilised the entire sale proceeds on account of sale of shares. The amount to the extent it has not been utilised for the purchase of the residential house is not entitled for benefit of section 54F of the Act. The Tribunal was of the opinion that when th....