TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (1) TMI 563
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssed as not pressed. 4. Ground Nos. 3 and 4 raised by the assessee are relating to denial of deduction u/s. 54F of the Act. 5. I note that the assessee is an HUF, derives income from business, capital gains and from other sources. According to the AO, the assessee's share declared at 21% from profit from the business i.e. housing project under the name and style as "Shriram Residency". The assessee shown long term capital gain of Rs.1,05,85,572/-. The assessee claimed for Rs.25,00,000/- deduction u/s. 54F of the Act. In support its claim, the assessee furnished copy of agreement for sale dated 19-03-2016 and according to the AO the said agreement for sale was not registered. The assessee contended that he has invested for purchase of a ne....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g the investment in the new asset at Rs.35,00,000/- and thus restricting the exemption u/s. 54F of the Act proportionately to the amount invested?" The brief facts before the Hon'ble High Court were that the AO determined net consideration at Rs.75.39 lakhs, but allowed proportionate exemption of Rs.31.55 lakhs which was paid till the filing of return from capital gain in terms of section 54F of the Act. The AO disallowed the balance consideration and brought to tax under the head capital gains on account of assessee's failure to deposit the unutilized consideration for purchase of new flat in specified bank accounts in accordance with the scheme of Central Government as provided u/s. 54F of the Act. The CIT(A) though recorded assessee obta....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....th regard to capital gain arising from housing project i.e. Shriram Residency. Therefore, in my opinion, the assessee is entitled to proportionate deduction to the extent investment made in a new property up to the filing of return of income. I note that the AO disallowed entire claim made u/s. 54F of the Act to the extent of Rs.25,00,000/- which was confirmed by the CIT(A). Therefore, in terms of the decision of Hon'ble High Court of Bombay, that the assessee is entitled to claim proportionate deduction as evident from receipts at pages 126 to 128 of the paper book, which are payments made towards new property and also the said payments were made before filing of return of income. Admittedly, the return of income was filed on 31-07-2014 wh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....an extent of Rs.72,21,240/-. Before me, the ld. AR placed on record the order of Surat Bench of Tribunal in the case of Babubhai Arjanbhai Kanani (HUF) reported in 130 taxmann.com 112 (Surat-Trib.) The relevant portions of the said decision of Surat Bench Tribunal are as under : "12. Now coming to the assessee`s case under consideration, in the light of the above noted judicial precedents, we note that entire purchase consideration for agricultural land was paid by utilizing money of HUF. We note that Purchase Deed is in the name of the Coparcener ( one of the HUF members). However, the property (land) is owned by HUF. The property (land) is shown in the Balance Sheet of HUF. The Co-parcerner of the HUF may hold property on behalf of the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on of his agricultural land, assessee could not be denied deduction u/s. 54B of the Act merely because registered document of new land was executed in name of his wife. On perusal of para 12 of the said order of Surat Bench of Tribunal which held the HUF is owner of the said agricultural land though it is registered in the name of the coparcener, as the HUF is enjoying all the benefits of the said agricultural land. Admittedly, in the present case, the assessee being an HUF purchased agricultural land to an extent of Rs.72,21,240/- in individual capacity. The copy of said purchase deeds of agricultural land are furnished from pages 16 to 53 of the paper book. Further, I find the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Ravinder Kumar Aror....