TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (10) TMI 661
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eal is as to, whether the CIT(Appeals) was justified in denying the benefit of deduction to assessee u/s. 54 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act'). Under Section 54 of the Act, if capital gain arises from the transfer of a long-term capital asset, being buildings or land appurtenant thereto, and being a residential house, the income of which is chargeable under the head "Income from house property" (referred to in Sec.54 of the Act as the original asset), and the assessee has (i) within a period of one year before, or (ii) two years after the date on which the transfer took place (a) purchased, or (b) has within a period of three years after that date constructed, a residential house, then, capital gain will be allowed as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....city usage for the period from Sept. 2012 to Feb. 2013. The assessee sold the property on 30.10.2009 and to claim deduction u/s. 54 of the Act, the Assessee ought to have completed the construction within a period of 3 years from the date of transfer of the original asset, i.e., on or before 29.10.2012. 5. The AO, however, recomputed the income from Long Term Capital Gains at Rs. 25,59,560/- by varying the assessee' share of consideration to Rs. 48,00,000/- as against Rs. 40,00,000/- reported by the assessee. Thus, the AO computed the long term capital gains before deduction u/s.54 of the Act at Rs. 25,59,560/- as against the sum of Rs. 17,59,560/- reported by the assessee. 6. The AO thereafter noticed that the assessee had purchased ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e photograph cannot be considered as appropriate evidence in this case for following reasons: * The photograph does not reveal the date on which it was taken. * The photograph does no reveal the exact location of the place as Plot no.704 can be written anywhere and photograph of the same can be taken by standing beside that. * The structure shown in the photograph appears to be just a temporary storage shed which is normally made for the storage of construction material before starting construction. Thus the photograph does not reveal that the structure made on the property can be considered as a residential house. * The appellant has not given any occupation certificate if any residential house was const....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... sold the property on 30.10.2009 and claimed the benefit of deduction u/s. 54 of the Act. He ought to have completed the construction on or before 29.10.2012. The evidence on record goes to show that there was a structure that had come up over the property. The sanctioned plan, usage of electricity, payment of property tax, usage of electricity for the period from Sept. 2012 to Feb. 2013, all go to show that the property existed over the site purchased by the assessee. All these evidence go to show that assessee had put up structure over the site purchased by him. The CIT(A) has come to a conclusion that the Assessee did not construct a residential house within a period of 3 years from the date of transfer of the original asset, on the b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....se & requires to be construed liberally for achieving that purpose. The intention of the Legislature was to encourage investments in the acquisition of a residential house and completion of construction or occupation is not the requirement of law. The words used in the section are 'purchased' or 'constructed'. The condition precedent for claiming benefit u/s 54F is that the capital gain should be parted by the assessee and invested either in purchasing a residential house or in constructing a residential house. Merely because the sale deed had not been executed or that construction is not complete and it is not in a fit condition to be occupied does not disentitle the assessee to claim s. 54F relief. The Hon'ble Karnataka High Court foll....