TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (9) TMI 733
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... assessee read as under: "1. In law and in facts and circumstances of the Appellant's case, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has grossly erred in points of law and facts. 2. In law and in facts and circumstances of the Appellant's case, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has grossly erred in confirming addition on account of exemption claimed u/s 54F of Income Tax Act of Rs 59,32,904. 3. In law and in facts and circumstances of the Appellant's case, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has grossly erred in confirming interest u/s 234B of Rs 12,37,715. 4. In law and in facts and circumstances of the Appellant's case, the learned Commissioner of Inco....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssessee has raised as many as six grounds in the appeal, the sole issue pressed for adjudication arising in the present appeal which has come up before us in second round, relates to the disallowance of claim of exemption of capital gains under section 54F of the Act amounting to Rs. 59,32,904/-. 7. The facts pertaining to the same being that the assessee had alongwith other co-owners sold land in the impugned year for Rs. 2,29,46,000/-, his share in the same being Rs. 64,75,000/- .The assessee had computed capital gains earned thereon and claimed exemption thereof under section 54F of the Act on account of investment of the capital gains in a new residential property amounting to Rs. 59,32,904/-. The AO noted that the assessee had purch....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....consideration arising on sale of 'original asset' ( transfer of a long term capital asset not being a residential house) for the purpose of construction of residential house notwithstanding delay in construction within the stipulated period of 3 years. At the threshold, we find ourselves in agreement with the proposition canvassed on behalf of the assessee that section 54F of the IT Act is a beneficial provision for promoting the construction of residential house and therefore requires to be construed liberally for achieving that purpose. The intention of literature is to encourage investments in the acquisition of residential house and completion of construction or occupation is not the strict requirement of the law so long as the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lved. It was asserted on behalf of the assessee that the construction of a residential house has been eventually completed. Copies of some electricity bills were produced to lend support to such assertions. However, a bare reading of S. 54F would suggest that construction of house beyond stipulated time limit of 3 years is not the only condition precedent for eligibility of deduction claimed. The other conditions would thus continue to apply. 10. Pertinent here to note that investment made for the purposes of construction of new residential House prior to the sale of original asset would not be entitled for deduction under section 54F of the Act. The money deployed in purchase of land and construction of residential house thereon a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Act, however, at the same time, the ITAT restored the issue to the file of the AO to denovo examining the claim of exemption of the assessee. 9. Subsequently, we have noted that, in the set aside proceedings before the AO, the assessee did not file any evidence of construction activity carried out by it, despite several opportunities given by the AO, and the AO accordingly reiterated the addition made to the income of the assessee by denying grant of exemption under section 54F of the Act of Rs. 59,32,904/-. Before the ld.CIT(A) also none appeared on behalf of the assessee, and accordingly, the ld.CIT(A) passed an ex parte order confirming the addition made by the AO. The pleadings of the ld.counsel for the assessee before us was tha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in the appellate proceedings also. It is clear, therefore, that the assessee has been lax in pursuing its matter before the Revenue authorities. No plausible reasons for the same have been adduced before us. In the light of the same, though the assessee ideally should not be given any further opportunity, but in the interest of justice considering that even the ITAT noted the assessee to be in possession of certain facts/ documents to prove construction activity being carried out by it on the land purchased and the direction of the ITAT being that the assessee be allowed exemption even if construction is incomplete, we consider it fit to restore the matter back to the AO, giving the assessee one more opportunity to prove its claim of exempt....