Just a moment...

Report
FeedbackReport
Bars
Logo TaxTMI
>
×

By creating an account you can:

Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2022 (3) TMI 1337

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on 234A; 234B and 234C and the Id. CIT (Appeals) is not correct in confirming the levy/charge of interest. 3. The above grounds are mutually exclusive and without prejudice to one another. 4. The appellant craves leave to add to, amend, alter, modify, delete all or any of the above grounds appeal. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an NRI, who had sold the immovable property along with her father to Sri T.Janardhana Rao on 19.02.2010 for a consideration of 79,19,500/-. An order u/s 201(1)/(1A) was passed in the case of Sri T.Janardhana Rao on 12.02.2013 for not making TDS u/s 195 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'Act') on the payments made by him to the assessee. Subsequently, the assessee filed her income tax return for the A.Y.2010-11 on 17.05.2013 admitting sale consideration of Rs. 39,69,000/-, towards her share on account of the above transfer of property and claimed exemption u/s 54F for the entire long term capital gains shown at Rs. 17,89,099/- for reinvestment made by her in a house situated in United States of America. Notice u/s 148 was issued to the assessee on 30.03.2015 as the assessee is not eligible for such claim as reinvestment is stated....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e housing and infrastructure needs in India which is of paramount importance. Therefore, invariably, the reinvestment should be in a residential house located in India only and as per provisions of section 1(2) of the Act, the provisions of the Act extend to the whole of India, which means that any exemption or deduction cannot be allowed in respect of the amounts invested / reinvested outside India. The CBDT Circular No.1/2015 dated 21.01.2015 clearly mentioned that the benefit was intended for investment in residential house within India. The Ld.CIT(A) disallowed the exemption claimed u/s 54F by relying on numerous decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 5. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal and at the outset, the Ld.AR has submitted that the issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the coordinate bench and also the following decisions of the Hon'ble High Courts : (a) Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of CIT Vs. Vinay Mishra in IT.A. No.75/2013 dt.31.08.2020 (b) Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT Vs. Anurag Pandit in ITA No.1169/2018 dt.14.05.2019 and CIT Vs.Dipankar Mohan G....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....in a period of one year before or 66[two years] after the date on which the transfer took place purchased, or has within a period of three years after that date constructed, a residential house (hereafter in this section referred to as the new asset), the capital gain shall be dealt with in accordance with the following provisions of this section, that is to say,- (a) if the cost of the new asset is not less than the net consideration in respect of the original asset, the whole of such capital gain shall not be charged under section 45 ; (b) if the cost of the new asset is less than the net consideration in respect of the original asset, so much of the capital gain as bears to the whole of the capital gain the same proportion as the cost of the new asset bears to the net consideration, shall not be charged under section 45: 67[Provided that nothing contained in this sub-section shall apply where- (a) the assessee,- (i) owns more than one residential house, other than the new asset, on the date of transfer of the original asset; or (ii) purchases any residential house, other than the new asset, within a period of one year after the date of transfer of the original asset;....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... return [such deposit being made in any case not later than the due date applicable in the case of the assessee for furnishing the return of income under sub-section (1) of section 139] in an account in any such bank or institution as may be specified in, and utilised in accordance with, any scheme72 which the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, frame in this behalf and such return shall be accompanied by proof of such deposit ; and, for the purposes of sub-section (1), the amount, if any, already utilised by the assessee for the purchase or construction of the new asset together with the amount so deposited shall be deemed to be the cost of the new asset : Provided that if the amount deposited under this sub-section is not utilised wholly or partly for the purchase or construction of the new asset within the period specified in sub-section (1), then,- (i) the amount by which- (a) the amount of capital gain arising from the transfer of the original asset not charged under section 45 on the basis of the cost of the new asset as provided in clause (a) or, as the case may be, clause (b) of sub-section (1), exceeds (b) the amount that would not have....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... case stated (supra), two flats in question were admitedly adjacent to each other and which were joined to become one residential house. In the case of KhoobchandM.Makhija (supra), two door nos are given viz., 623 and 729, but the complete addresses and even the name of the city is not clear in the facts narrated in the said Judgment. But in our considered opinion, the difference of location of the newly purchased residential house(s) will not alter the position for interpretation of the word 'a residential house' to the effect that it may include more than one or plural residential houses, as held by Karnataka High Court, with which we respectfully agree. The location of the newly purchased houses by the same assessee viz., HUF out of sale consideration received on the sale of original capital Asset or a residential house in the given circumstances of availability of such residential houses as per the requirement of the HUF will not alter the position of interpretation. 21.In our understanding, if the word 'a' as employed under section 54 prior to its amendment and substitution by the words 'one' with effect from 1-4-2015 could not include plural units of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... against the Revenue. No order as to costs.' (ii) CIT v. Vinay Mishra [2020] 121 taxmann.com 243/[2021] 276 Taxman 68, wherein a Division Bench of the High Court of Karnataka held as follows: "... 8. The relevant extract of CBDT Circular No. 1/2015 dated 21-1-2015 reads as under: 20.5 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 residential property, for which investment is made needs to be situated in India for the purpose of claiming exemption under section 54F from Assessment year 2015-16 only and not prior to that period. In the instant case, the investment in a residential house was made in USA prior to 1-4- 2015, whereas, the requirement of making an investment in a residential house, which was incorporated by way of amendment, came into force w.e.f. 1-4-2015. In the light of aforesaid well settled legal principles as well as the memorandum of objects of Finance Act, 2014, which clearly provide that amendments will take effect from 1-4-2015 and will apply to Assessment year 2015-16 onwards as well as the CBDT's Cir....