AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (7) TMI 674
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in Bangalore North during the relevant assessment year. The above mentioned vacant land was sold vide two separate sale deed dated 24.05.2012. The sale proceedings of the vacant land was declared by the assessee in her return of income filed for the relevant assessment year, namely, A.Y.2013-2014 and exemption u/s 54F of the I.T.Act was claimed in respect of the house property constructed at No.617, Hebbal, Bangalore. The assessment was completed by disallowing the exemption u/s 54F of the I.T.Act on the premises that the assessee had failed to discharge the burden placed on her with respect to the construction of residential house and has not filed any documentary evidences in support of the claim of deduction u/s 54F of the I.T.Act. 4. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal to the first appellate authority. During the course of appellate proceedings, the CIT(A) sought for a remand report and on receipt of the same, the appeal was disposed of by confirming the denial of exemption u/s 54F of the I.T.Act. The CIT(A) was of the view that the assessee had built multiple residential units instead of one residential unit. The CIT(A) further held that the units were let out and w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... "single". It was concluded by the Hon'ble High Court that, being an indefinite article, the said expression should be read in consonance with the other words "buildings" and "lands" and, therefore, the singular "a residential house" also permits use of plural by virtue of section 13(2) of the General Clauses Act. A similar view was taken by the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of D.Ananda Basappa v. ITO reported in 209 ITR 329 (Kar.). 7.1 Further, the amendment to section 54 of the I.T.Act with effect from 01.04.2015 has been held to be prospective by the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Arun K.Thiagarajan (supra). The relevant finding of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Arun K.Thiagarajan (supra), reads as follow:- "12. A Bench of this court in the case of Smt.KG Rukminiamma (supra) dealt with the meaning of expression `a residential house' used in Section 54(1) of the Act while taking into account Section 132(2) of the General Clauses Act, 1897 held that unless there is anything repugnant in the subject or context, the words in singular shall include the plural and vice versa. It was further held that context in which the expres....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... made in one residential house situated in India. 2.5 Applicability - These amendments take effect from 1st April, 2015 and will accordingly apply in relation to assessment year 2015-16 and subsequent assessment years. Thus, it is axiomatic that the aforesaid amendment was specifically applied only prospectively with effect from assessment year 2015-16. 14. The subsequent amendment of section 54(1) also fortifies the fact that the legislature felt the need of amending the provisions of the Act with a view to give a definite meaning to the expression `a residential house', which was interpreted as plural by various courts by taking into account the context in which the aforesaid expression was used. The subsequent amendment of the Act also fortifies the view taken by this court as well as Madras High Court and Delhi High Court. It is trite law that the principle underlying the decision would be binding as precedent in a case. In Halsbury Laws of England, Volume 22. Page 1682. Page 796, the relevant extract reads as under: The enunciation of the reasons or principle on which a question before a court has been decided is alone binding as a precedent....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he source of the cash deposits in her bank accounts are as under:- Sl. No. Particulars Amount (Rs.) a. Cash received from purchaser of land sold during the year - Smt.S.Parthamma and Sri.Gangadhar H.S. on 09.03.2012 1,00,000 b. Cash received from purchaser of land sold during the year - Sri.R.Srinivasas on 24.05.2012 15,50,000 c. Accumulated savings of appellant. 1,50,000 I. Total - Source accepted by the CIT(A) 18,00,000 d. Repayment of loan by agriculturist Sri.K.M.Srinivas on 26.05.2012 10,00,000 e. Cash received from agriculturist Mrs.Lakshmidevamma, relative of the assessee on 24.05.2012 2,00,000 f. Cash loan obtained from Sri.A.N.Srinivas on 02.02.2013 5,00,000 II. Total - Source not accepted by the CIT(A) 17,00,000 Total I + II 35,00,000 The appellant submits that the disallowance under section 68 of the Act is uncalled for on the facts and circumstances of the case. The appellant is extracting the provisions of section 68 for convenience: "68. Where any sum is found credited in the books of the assessee maintained for any previous year, and the assesse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in CIT v. Pragati Co-operative Bank Ltd. (2005) 278 ITR 170 (Guj.) The appellant submits that she has discharged the primary onus by giving the affidavits and confirmation letters from the three persons confirming paying money to the appellant in cash which ought to have been appreciated by the lower authorities and ought to have summoned the persons. Under law the appellant can be asked to prove the source of the credits in the books of account but not the source of the source. Reliance is placed on the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of DCIT v. Rohini Builders (2002)256 ITR 360. The Hon'ble Supreme Court dismissed the Special Leave Petition filed by the revenue against this judgment is reported in (2002) 254 ITR (St.) 275. It is also submitted that the learned CIT(A) erred in holding that the affidavits submitted by the 3 parties i.e., Sri.K.M.Srinivas, Mrs.Lakshmidevamma and Sri.A.N.Srinivas have stated that they are agriculturists however any of them have any income chargeable to tax is not mentioned in the affidavits and failed to appreciate that the second proviso to Secti....