2022 (3) TMI 651

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....has erred in upholding the order of Assessing Officer passed u/s 154 as AO did not have any jurisdiction to rectify the order u/s 143(3); and secondly, ld. CIT (A) erred in confirming the disallowance of exemption claimed by the assessee u/s 54 of the Act. 3. The facts in brief are that the assessee has filed her return of income showing total income of Rs. 24,70,668/-. In the return of income, the assessee has claimed exemption u/s 54 in respect of long term capital gain arising out of sale of a property and purchase of new house property. Assessing is joint owner of a property at A-1/112, Safdarjung Enclave along her husband. The property was divided into two portions, the assessee was the 100% owner of the Southern portion of this prope....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....12; side) 45,06,829 24.01.2013 Long Term Capital Gain on sale of Property (Northern side) 36,74,449/- Exemption claimed u/s 54 on Purchase of immovable house Property on 13.01.2012 81,81,278/- .......... From the aforesaid facts, it is crystal clear that the assessee has purchased the new capital asset (on 13.01.2012) beyond the permissible period of one year before the date on which the transfer took place (i.e. on 24.01.2013). Therefore, the claim of exemption u/s 54 to the tune of Rs. 36,74,449/- shall be disallowed. In order to rectify the above mistake, a notice u/s 154 dated 02.03.2017 was issued to the assessee to file the reply on or before 08.03.2017. The assessee has filed her reply vide letters dated 08.03.2017 and....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... prior, i.e., on 13.01.2012 for which exemption has been denied as according to them the registry of sale should have been on or before 13th Jan 2013. Whereas the prescribed time for making the investment prior to the sale of property was from 13.01.2012 to 13.01.2013 and here in this case, the assessee has made the investment in the new property prior to the prescribed period on 13.01.2012 and sold on 24.01.2013 and hence there it is beyond 1 year. Thus, once the sale consideration was received and possession was given and simply because the registration was done on some later date, the exemption cannot be denied. 5. On the other hand, ld. DR strongly relied upon the order of the AO and ld. CIT (A) and clearly the exemption us 54 cannot b....