TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (4) TMI 297
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion of the assessee filed under section 154 wherein assessee has contended that while adjudicating the appeal, substantial argument of the assessee has not been adjudicated by the learned CIT(A). 2. The appellant craves leave for any addition, deletion or amendment in the grounds of appeal on or before disposal of appeal. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessment order u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') was framed by the Assessing Officer vide order dated 13.10.2009 for the assessment year under consideration, wherein, the Assessing Officer having denied the deduction claimed by the assessee u/s 54F of the Act and has computed the capital gains at Rs. 29,34,143/- as against Rs. 10,60,286/- d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... set off against the purchase of one Residential house at Panchkula amounting to Rs. 15,20,000/- and one residential house at Baddi (HP) amounting to Rs. 12,96,000/- and LTCG of Rs. 1,21,143/- was set off against the Long Term Capital Loss. 8. The above exemption has been wrongly claimed by the appellant because as per section 54F exemption is available only for one residential house. This view has been held in the case of ITO Vs Sushila M Jhaveri (ITAT, Mum-SB) 1087 ITD 327, where Hon'ble Tribunal held that exemption u/s 54/54F is allowable in respect of one residential house. 9 However, in the A.Y.2006-07 the residential house at Panchkula, the appellant reversed the exemption u/s 54F claimed against the above house in the return ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....time of possession. Thus, as per schedule of payment, the tentative payments are to be made within a period of 15 months. In such a situation as per sub section of section (4) of Section 54F of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the amount which has not been utilized for the purchase of new asset before the furnishing of return of income u/s 139 shall be deposited by him in a capital gain scheme before the due date of filing of return and the return shall be accompanied by proof of such deposit. As per the material on record, the assessee has not furnished any details regarding investment in the Capital Gain Scheme. Also, the return of income for the asstt. Year 2005-06 does not contain any evidence of deposit in the capital gain scheme. In view of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....issed the application of the assessee observing that the CIT(A) has discussed the issue in detail after careful consideration of the rival submissions and the material on record and that it was not a fit case for exercise of jurisdiction u/s 154 of the Act. The relevant part of the order of the CIT(A) passed on the application u/s 154 of the Act is reproduced as under:- "3.2.1 Before, delving into the merit of the issue at hand, it is pertinent to understand the scope and ambit of section 154 of the Act as has been elaborated upon in various noted judicial pronouncements. A MISTAKE APPARENT ON THE RECORD must be an obvious and patent mistake and not something which can be established by a long-drawn process of reasoning on points on which....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ons of the assessee have been decided vide order dated 30.1.2014 of the Tribunal. The assessee did not opt to take the ground relating to the denial of deduction u/s 54F of the Act either by way of appeal against the order of the CIT(A) or in the Cross objections filed against the appeal of the Department which were disposed of by way of common order of the Tribunal dt 30.1.2014. 7. After the decision of the appeal as well as the Cross objections of the assessee on 30.1.2014, the assessee filed the rectification application before the Ld. CIT(A) much after the passing of the order which was decided by the CIT(A) on 29.3.2019. From the sequence of the events, it is apparent that initially the assessee did not choose to contest the dismissal....