TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (3) TMI 1031
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....report., wherein he adopted the Land & Building method of valuation being the most appropriate method of valuation and determined the FMV of the property at Rs.1,25,30,606/- by considering the factors like type of property, transactions, & specific situation of the property etc,. 1.3 The Hon'ble Madras High Court, in the case of MA. Jagannathan Sailaja China v. The Income Tax officer, T.C.A. NoJ42 of 2019, Dated 15,02.2019 dealing with similar question held that ' A bare reading of Scheme of Sec. 50C of the Act would show that Assessee can object to presumptive value as per Sec.50C (1) and, therefore, it is only after hearing the objections of the Assessee, the Fair Market Value of the Capital Asset as per * Guidance Value" can be determined by the authorities. The Assessee cannot be denied an opportunity to raise his objections even against the presumptive Fair Market Value under Sec, 50C (1) of the Act or Report of DVO under Section 50C (2) of the Act and the Assessing Authority or the Appellate Authorites, whose powers are co-extensive with those of the Assessing Authority, cannot refuse to meet those objections point by point'. 1.4 The Hon'ble Delhi High Cou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the valuation report on 3.9.2018, wherein the value was estimated at Rs.2,84,63,205/- as against the declared value of Rs.1.55 lakhs. After considering the valuation report, ld. CIT(A) observed that the objections raised by the assessee were raised before the valuation officer also and he has taken into account those objections and has disposed of the same by a speaking order. The ld. CIT(A) has gone through the valuation report dated 03.09.2018 wherein the valuation officer has discussed in detail the objections raised by the assessee and the ground on which the objections had been dismissed. The valuation officer has estimated the value of the property in question at Rs.2,34,63,205/- as against the value declared by the assessee at Rs.1,55,00,000/- after making detailed enquiry and taking into account all the relevant factors. The assessee has not brought any evidence to prove that the report of the valuation officer has a fallacy and that it cannot be relied upon. Therefore, the objection of the assessee to the report of the valuation officer was rejected by the ld. CIT(A). However, the ld. CIT(A) observed that the value to be adopted at Rs.2,34,63,205/- in the place of Rs.26,65....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at claim of the assessee regarding investment made in purchase of the site of Rs.36,00,000/- even if the assessee finally could not construct the new house within the time period specified under section 54F once the assessee has invested the sale proceeds of existing asset for the purposes of construction of new house the deduction u/s,54F cannot be denied. 2.2 That the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of CIT v. Mrs. Shakuntala Devi (2016) 389ITR 366/75 taxmann.com 222 (Kar.) has held that' the condition precedent for claiming benefit under said provision is that the capital gains realized from sale of a capital asset should be reinvested with in purchasing a residential house or utilised for constructing a residential house. If it is established that consideration so received on transfer of the asset has been invested in either purchasing a residential house or spent on construction of a residential house, an assessee would be entitled to the benefit U/S.54F of the Act irrespective of the fact that transaction not being complete in all respects. 2.3 In the case of CIT v, Smt B.S. Shantakumarl (2015) 233 Taxmann 347/60 taxmann.com 74 (Kar.) it was held that i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... this assessee is in appeal before us. 5.3 In this regard, it is to be borne in mind that the assessee had sold the above mentioned two properties on 22.11.2013 and 28.11.2013. Therefore, he was required to purchase a house within a period of two years or construct a house within a period of three years. Section 54F(1) gives a time limit for the said purpose. In this case the assessee was required to buy a house on or before 28.11.2015 or construct a house on or before 28.11.2016, but in the instant case the assessee has bought the land only on 07.10.2016 i.e. nearly towards the completion of three years from the date of sale of the property. The assessee does not have any evidence that the construction activity started within a period of three years, so there is no question of completion of construction of the residential house within that period. In the certificate of the Chartered Engineer also it is mentioned that construction activity has been stopped since February, 2017. During the appeal proceedings also the ld. AR stated that construction activity has stopped since February, 2017 and has not resumed since then. The ld. AR has filed copies of various judgments contending t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eted within the period of 3 years from the date of sale of the capital asset as stipulated in section 54F of the Act. For better understanding we have to go through the provisions of section 54F of the Act which reads as follows: "54F(1) [Subject to the provisions of sub-section (4), where, in the case of an assessee being an individual or a Hindu undivided family], the capital gain arises from the transfer of any long-term capital asset, not being a residential house (hereafter in this section referred to as the original asset), and the assessee has, *within a period of one year before or [two years] after the date on -which the transfer took place purchased, or has within a period of three years after that date [constructed, one residential house in India] (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, this 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 respe....