AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (6) TMI 1084
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e assessees are husband and wife. ITA No. 2256/2013 has been filed by Smt. K. Jothirani & ITA No. 2257/2013 has been filed by Shri M. Kumarasamy, husband of Smt.K. Jothirani. In ITA No. 2256/2013, the assessee has impugned the order of CIT(Appeals) on the following grounds: i. Denial of exemption u/s. 54F of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (herein after referred to as 'the Act'); ii. Income of Rs.37,85,000/- received from sale of trees assessed as un-explained income; iii. Treating agricultural income of Rs.30,000/- as nonagricultural income; iv. Addition of income Rs.67,645/- allegedly admitted by the assessee; and v. Levy of interest u/s. 234A, 234B & 234C of the Act. 2. In ITA No. 2257/Mds/2013, the assessee has r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....exemption u/s. 54F to both husband and wife on the ground that, both the assessees have purchased another residential house i.e., second new asset within one year from the purchase of residential house i.e., the first new asset and thus, are ineligible to claim exemption by virtue of proviso to section 54F(1). The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that both the assessees had purchased residential houses from their own sources. Wife included the name of her husband and the husband included the name of his wife for the sake of convenience, sentiments and security. Since both the assessees had acquired new assets from their respective sources they are entitled for claiming exemption u/s. 54F. The residential property at Mogappair, Chennai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ection 54F. The denial of benefit merely on the ground that the assessees who are husband and wife have purchased second residential houses in their joint names, in our considered opinion, is not justified. The husband has included the name of his wife while purchasing residential property out of love, affection and sentiments. Similarly, the wife has included the name of husband in the residential property acquired out of her own funds out of love and affection and sentiments. Moreover, a partial interest in the new residential asset acquired will not disentitle the assessee from claiming exemption u/s. 54F of the Act. The words used in the proviso to section are 'any residential house'. The Legislature in its wisdom has excluded partial i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., wherein, it was held that a fractional ownership was not sufficient for claiming even fractional depreciation under section 32 of the Act". Therefore, in our considered opinion, the authorities below have erred in not granting the benefit of section 54F to both the assessees. Both the assessees succeed on this issue. 5. The other issues raised in ITA No. 2256/2013 are addition of Rs.37.85 Lakhs from sale of trees treated as un-explained income. The assessee is allegedly having agricultural land measuring 12 acres approximately, from which she has earned Rs.37.85 Lakhs by sale of causarina trees. The CIT(Appeals) in his order has categorically mentioned that the assessee has not placed on record any documentary evidence to show tha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... contrary to the facts on record. The assessee owns 3.5 acres of agricultural land at Kulamangalam and Panakkulam, Pudikkottai Dist. This fact has not been disputed by the Revenue. The agricultural income worked out by the assessee is Rs.10,000/- per acre. We find that the estimation made by the assessee is fair and reasonable. Therefore, the addition made on this account is deleted. 7. The next issue in appeal of the assessee is with regard to addition of income admitted by assessee Rs.67,645/-. The assessee during the course of examination made statement u/s. 131 that, the income from M/s. Arul Murugan Real Merchants was in fact Rs.1.00 Lakh whereas, in her return of income she has admitted Rs.32,355/-. The assessee had agreed for additi....