AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (9) TMI 155
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lowing grounds of appeal: "1. The order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is contrary to law, facts and circumstances of the case. 2. For that the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in upholding the order passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, reopened without there being any tangible/valid reason that income had escaped assessment. 3. For that the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the denial of exemption claimed u/s 54F of the Act for Rs. 64,92,456/- and thereby bringing it to tax as 'Long Term Capital Gains'. 4. For that the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in rejecting the alternate plea made by the appellan....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd the co-owners has received 91833 sq.ft. of super built up area comprised in 70 residential apartments and 3 penthouses along with 27 covered car parking and 49 open car parking. The appellant has computed long term capital gains from transfer of property in pursuant to JD Agreement dated 01.04.2011 for assessment year 2012-13, by taking her share of consideration received for transfer of property. The appellant had also claimed deduction u/s. 54F of the Act towards constructed flats to be received from builder. The Assessing Officer, denied deduction u/s. 54F of the Act, on the ground that the assessee has claimed deduction for multiple flats and further construction of property was completed beyond the due date specified as per the prov....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t. Aggrieved by the CIT(A) order, the assessee is in appeal before us. 5. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee, submitted that ld. CIT(A) has erred in not allowing deduction claimed u/s. 54F of the Act, towards new residential flat purchased on 24.05.2012 for a consideration of Rs. 1,45,00,000/-, even though the assessee has satisfied all conditions prescribed u/s. 54F of the Act for claiming the benefit of deduction. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee, further submitted that no doubt, the builder did not complete the construction of residential apartments on or before three years, for the assessee to be eligible for claiming deduction u/s. 54F of the Act. But, fact remains that completion of construction of flats in pursuant to JD agreement i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rejected deduction claimed u/s. 54F of the Act and their order should be upheld. 7. We have heard both the parties, perused materials available on record and gone through orders of the authorities below. The fact with regard to the transfer of property in pursuant to JD Agreement dated 01.04.2011 and consideration received in pursuant to said JD Agreement was not in dispute. In fact, the assessee and the Assessing Officer both agreed that there is a transfer of immovable property and consideration has been received for said transfer. The only dispute is with regard to the deduction u/s. 54F of the Act. The assessee has claimed deduction u/s. 54F of the Act, towards flats to be received in pursuant to JD Agreement. The Assessing Officer, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....spect of purchase of new residential house property purchased on 25.04.2012 for a consideration of Rs. 1,45,00,000/-. The ld. CIT(A) rejected alternate claim made by the assessee without discussing how such claim cannot be admitted. No doubt, the assessee is not entitled to claim deduction u/s. 54F of the Act, for flats received in pursuant to JD Agreement, because as per the Assessing Officer, completion of construction of said flats was completed in the financial year 2021. Since, construction of flats was not completed for the impugned assessment year, those flats cannot be treated as purchase or acquired by the assessee for the purpose of deduction u/s. 54F of the Act. If you leave behind flats to be received by the assessee in pursuant....