TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (9) TMI 544
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nue authorities were justified in bringing to tax long term capital gain (LTCG) at Rs. 1,50,35,192/- on a protective basis in the hands of the assessee. 3. The assessee is an individual. The assessee is a son of one Shri. P. S. Vishwanathappa. The assessee also has a brother by name Shri. P. V. Sumanth. The assessee, his father and brother owned land at BBMP, Katha No.33 at 5th Main Road, K P Puttana Chetty Road, Ward No.142, Chamrajpet, Bengaluru. The assessee's father Shri. P. S. Vishwanathappa obtained the aforesaid property under a registered partition deed dated 05.05.195. The total area of the land was 8840 sq.ft. 4. On 15.07.1983, by a registered partition deed, the land area of 8840 sq.ft. was partitioned between the assessee,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 1,23,31,648 Long term capital gain 11,11,610 8. The AO identified 3 issues that arose for consideration before him as follows: a. Whether the transaction involved results in capital gain in the hands of the assessee as one of the co-owner or his father Sri. P.S. Vishwanathappa as the kartha of HUF b. If the transaction involved results in capital gain in the hands of the assessee, what should be deemed sale consideration received or receivable by the assessee. c. If the transaction involved results in capital gain in the hands of the assessee, whether he is entitled for deduction u/s. 54F. 9. On the first issue, the AO came to the conclusion that the property in question was a joint family property ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... assessee claiming deduction u/s. 54F to acquire any other residential property liable to be taxed under the head income from house property other than the new asset which is used for claiming the deduction u/s. 54F. In the case of the assessee, he has acquired another flat within the specified time than the one claimed deduction u/s. 54F. Hence, he is not eligible for deduction u/s. 54F of the I.T. Act, 1961." 10. Finally, the AO brought the capital gain computed by him in the hands of the assessee in his individual capacity protectively and reserved his right to tax the capital gain in the hands of the HUF on the substantive basis. 11. Before the CIT(A), the assessee submitted that the Assessing Officer (AO) did not pass any order i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the share of the assessee, there was no substantive order preceding the protective order. On this aspect the order of CIT(A) is silent, had not expressed any opinion by speaking order. The learned counsel therefore prayed that the tribunal be pleased to set aside the assessee's case to the Assessing Officer with the direction to the Assessing Officer that Capital Gains should be computed at the rate of cost of construction of flats, on the assessee's share only and allow the exemption claimed by the Appellant u/s 54F of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The learned DR relied on the order of the CIT(A)/ 13. After hearing the rival submissions, we are of the view that the issue of computation of capital gain has to be remanded to the AO fo....