2016 (11) TMI 1602

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ik Andhyarujina i/b. Sameer Dalal for the Respondent ORDER P. C. 1. This Appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) challenges the order dated 4th September, 2013 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (the Tribunal). The impugned order is in respect of Assessment Year 2009-2010. 2. Mr. Chhotaray, the learned counsel appearing for the Revenue urges the followi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ing that the expenditure of Rs. 58,26,773/purportedly incurred by the assessee on renovating the new asset, after its purchase by the assessee, to make it habitable would be included in the cost of the new asset and would be allowable as exemption under Section 54F of the Act? (3) Without prejudice to the above, whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tri....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ion 54F can be claimed?" 3. Regarding Question no.(1): (a) The impugned order of the Tribunal has allowed the respondentassessee's appeal by following the decisions of its Coordinate Benches at Mumbai in Saleem Fazuebhoi v/s. DCIT 106 ITD 167 and Mrs. Sonia Gulati v/s. ITO (2001) 115 Taxman 232 (Mum.) to hold that the expenditure incurred on making the house habitable should be considere....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sel for the Revenue also urges that the impugned order of the Tribunal holding on fact that the expenditure of Rs. 58.26 lakhs had been incurred to make the purchased house habitable, is factually not correct. In support he sought to draw our attention to the order of the CIT(A). However, we find that the impugned order of the Tribunal records "we have considered the rival submissions as well as t....