2019 (2) TMI 362

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the Appellant satisfied all conditions mentioned in section 54 of the Act, and hence, was entitled to exemption under section 54 of the Act. 2. In the alternative and without prejudice to the above, the CIT (A) failed to appreciate that the Appellant was entitled to exemption under section 54F of the Act. Therefore, the CIT (A) erred in confirming the order of the AU in taxing long term capital gains of Rs. 53,96,820/-. 3. The CIT (A) failed to appreciate that the AU did not allow the benefit of indexation despite assessing income as long term capital gains. II. Taxing notional rental income of Rs. 2,09,389/- 4. The CIT (A) failed to appreciate that the property at Sai Enterprises and the Satellite Flat were under construction duri....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....being heard. 2. The additional evidence have direct bearing on the issues involved in the present appeal relating to the Addition of Rs. 53,96,829/-. According to the Assessee, said amount represents the deduction denied on the long term capital gain. 3. The reason for not being able to provide the necessary documents before the AO, was primarily because the Assessee's health was not in a good condition and hence the assessee was unable to provide complete details with respect to the issue involved in the appeal. The Assessee has been suffering from uncontrolled diabetes which has led to the assessee facing multiple health problems. The assessee is a 65 year old widow and does not have anyone in the family living with her to support....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y Rs. 53 lakhs. The assesse does not have any active source of income and hence is not in a sound financial position. Therefore, the additional evidence may be admitted in the interest of justice. 6. The appellant submits that the Hon'ble Bench has been vested with the discretion to admit the additional evidence under Rule 29 of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. 7. The Appellant prays that your honors may be pleased to admit the additional evidence as evidence goes to the root of the issues. It is therefore, respectfully submitted that the aforesaid additional evidence may kindly be admitted in the interest of justice and fair play. The Appellant relies on the ratio laid by Bombay High Court in the case of Smt. Prabhavati Shah v. CIT 231 ....