TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (11) TMI 73
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Act') for Assessment Year 2013-14, whereby and whereunder penalty was imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act to the tune of Rs.12,77,200/- on account of disallowance of exemption under Section 54F and 54EC of the Act. 2. During the year under consideration, the assessee has sold one capital assets on 09.11.2012 at an amount of Rs.81,50,000/- and stated to have been invested in bonds of Rs.41,00,000/- and deposited Rs.20,00,000/- in Capital Gain Account Scheme held with SBI & claimed deduction under Section 54EC & 54F respectively. 3. During the course of assessment proceedings, no evidence has been filed by the assessee in support of the claim as mentioned hereinabove. However, upon investigation made by the Ld.AO, it was revealed ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....not purchasing any bond of Rs.41,00,000/- but invested Rs.30,00,000/- to purchase the property till the date of filing of the return of income out of total investment of the property of Rs.45,00,000/-. At that juncture, upon further verification, it appears that such revised claim as made by the assessee of investment of Rs.30,00,000/- in the new property was found not sustainable. In fact, it was categorically mentioned in the deed of sale itself which was registered on 16.09.2105 that it was ready built bungalow which was further corroborated with photograph annexed with the said deed. Apart from that making investment of Rs.30,00,000/- as per the revised statement of income before filing the return of income was also found to be incorrec....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....urchased a readymade bungalow against her sold open plots of land vide deed R No. 11752/2012 dated 09/11/2012 for consideration of Rs. 81,50,000/-. Considering these facts, and though the assessee had not originally disclosed the real truth of transaction which was initially look that it would be covered u/s. 54F of the IT Act, 1961. However on going through the section which reads as under: Section 54F of the IT act, 1961: As per section 54F of the IT act, two important conditions reported below were brought to the assessee's notice: A. Purchase of new House (i) It should be purchased within one year before the date of transfer of original asset, (ii) It should be purchased within two year after the date of transfer of original....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....,000/-) claimed to had been paid on 29/01/2013 and balance Rs. 15,00,000/- paid on 11/09/2015. It was observed that the assessee was trying to misguide the Income tax department by furnishing inaccurate details about the payments to be made for purchase of new RHP i.e. Rs. 11,00,000/-and in this way trying to say that the claim was made for deduction u/s 54F of the IT act. As a matter of fact there was no purchase deed when the return was furnished on 14/03/2014. There was no claim u/s 54Fofthe IT Act in respect of property purchased forRs. 45,00,000/-,the deed for which has been registered vide R. No. 13206/2015 dated 16/09/2015 i.e. much later than the date of furnishing of return for A.Y. 2013-14." 4.1 Thus, it is found that the assesse....