2018 (12) TMI 908

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... it, I am satisfied that the delay in filing of the appeal is due to sufficient cause. Accordingly, I condone the delay and hear the appeal for adjudication on merit. 3. The dispute in the present appeal is confined to denial of deduction claimed under section 54 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter "the Act"). 4. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee, an individual, initially did not file his return of income for the impugned assessment year within the due date as prescribed under section 139(1) of the Act. Subsequently, on the basis of AIR information that the assessee has sold an immovable property during the relevant previous year but has not offered any capital gain, the Assessing Officer (AO) reopened the assessment ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... that the cost of acquisition of the original asset should be adopted at Rs. 3,85,000/- as per the valuation report of the Registered Valuer. As regards the claim of deduction under section 54 of the Act, the learned CIT(A) after referring to the provisions of Section 54 of the Act was of the view that for claiming benefit under the said provision the assessee must invest the capital gain/sale consideration in purchase of house property in its own name. In other words, for availing benefit under the aforesaid provision the assessee must be the owner of the property and/ or must be having legal title over the of the new legal owner of the new house property. For coming to such conclusion the learned CIT(A) primarily relied upon the decision ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... under section 54 of the Act in respect of investment made in a house property/flat purchased in the name of wife and adult daughter? A reading of Section 54 sub-section (1) of the Act makes it clear that the capital gain derived by the assessee from sale of the original asset if invested by him in purchase of a new asset within the stipulated period would be eligible for deduction under the said provision. In the present case there is no dispute with regard to the source of investment in the new house property. It is also a fact on record that the original asset sold by the assessee giving rise to the capital gain was owned by him with his wife. The AO has also taken note of the aforesaid fact and assessed 50% of the long term capital gain....