2023 (4) TMI 109

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... dated 28/11/2022 for the AY 2013-14. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee being an individual deriving income from Real Estate Business filed his return of income for the AY 2013-14 admitting the total income of Rs. 17,40,030/- belatedly on 04/12/2014. Subsequently, a search and seizure operation U/s. 132 was conducted in this case on 28/03/2018 wherein certain incriminating material was found and seized. The Ld. AO issued a notice U/s. 153A of the Act on 04/01/2021. In response to the said notice, the assessee filed the return of income on 06/02/2021 admitting the same income as admitted in his original return of income. The assessment was completed U/s. 143(3) r.w.s 153A of the Act on 21/09/2021 accepting the income return....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....2014 which is within a period of two years from the date of sale of the original property on 11/12/2012. The Ld. Pr. CIT found that the assessee has failed to comply with the provisions of section 54F(4) of the Act and therefore set-aside the assessment order and directed the Ld. AO to re-do the assessment after examining the claim made by the assessee by providing proper opportunity to the assessee of being heard. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. Pr. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before Tribunal. 3. The assessee has raised 07 grounds in his grounds of appeal however, the crux of the issue is with respect to: "The disallowance of capital gains claimed U/s. 54F of the Act due to failure of the assessee to deposit the amount ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nder the Capital Gain Account Scheme in order to claim benefit U/s. 54F of the Act for the impugned assessment year. The Ld. DR further submitted that the Ld. Pr. CIT has rightly directed the Ld. AO and the assessee is not entitled for deduction U/s. 54F of the Act. Therefore, the Ld. DR pleaded that the order of the Ld. Pr. CIT be upheld. 5. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record and the orders of the Ld. Revenue Authorities. It is not disputed by the Ld. Revenue Authorities that the assessee has made investment in a residential property on 15/11/2014 which is well within the period of two years as mandated U/s. 54F of the Act. The main contention of the Ld. Pr. CIT is that the assessee has not compl....