TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (8) TMI 445
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....harkhand, which is arising from the assessment order dt. 20-11-2017 passed u/s. 143(3) of the Income-tax Act by the Assessing Officer (AO), A.C.I.T, Circle-2, Ranchi. 2. The assessee has raised the following common grounds of appeal for the AY 2015-16:- 1. For that Ld. CIT(A) was not justified is not allowing deduction U/s 54F to the tune of Rs. 89,45,000/- for two flats purchased in name of appellant wife and son. As a matter of fact appellant purchased 3 flats (constituting one unit) in name of his wife, son and himself. Ld. CIT(A) allowed deduction to part of investment made in name of assessee and disallowed the deduction claimed in name of wife and son. This action of Ld CIT(A) was illegal and unjustified. Deduction should be allowe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ment and renovation made in these flats. After considering the submissions of the assessee, the ld. AO decided that since the assessee has made investments in flats purchased in the name of self, wife and son, the deduction u/s. 54F of the Act is allowable only to the extent made in the name of self i.e for flat no.102 for which consideration paid at Rs.37,43,500/-. For the remaining amount of investment made in the name of wife and son the deduction u/s. 54F was denied and also for want of necessary details the deduction for repairing and renovation cost at Rs.42,11,500/- was also rejected. Income assessed at Rs.3,10,30,490/-.. 4. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) and filed detailed submissions and also sub....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... filed registered sale deed dt. 17-10- 2015 for purchase of a building comprising of ground floor three flats and the purchaser(s) mentioned in this sale deed are Sri Mukkamala Srihari Rao(Self), Smt. Mukkmala Jhancy Lakshmi (Wife) and Sri Mukkamala Amar Rao (Son). As per said sale deed Flat No. 102 is registered under the name of assessee(self) and remaining two flats in the name of son and wife. 10. Now only dispute before us is that whether the sale consideration received by a person from sale of capital asset if applied in the name of his wife or son for purchasing/constructing residential house whether the assessee can claim deduction u/s. 54F or 54 of the Act?. 11. From going through the decision(s) relied on by the ld. Counsel for ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to claim deduction u/s. 54F of the Act subject to fulfilment of all other conditions provided u/s. 54F of the Act. We, thus, reverse the finding of the ld. CIT(A) and allow ground no.1 raised by the assssee and direct the ld.AO to allow the benefit of deduction u/s. 54F of the Act at Rs. 89,45,000/- for two flats purchased in the name of assessee's wife and son. 14. As regards ground no. 2 is concerned, it relates to deduction at Rs.42,11,500/- claimed by the assessee u/s. 54F of the Act towards cost of improvement of purchase of new flats. We notice that before the ld.AO assessee failed to file any evidence for the said expenditure of Rs.42,11,500/-. Even before the ld. CIT(A) the assessee failed to satisfy by filing necessary documentar....