TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (1) TMI 1006
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....46301(1) dated 25.04.2024 for the A.Y.2012-13 arising out of order passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'Act') dated 18.12.2019. 2. Brief facts of the case are that, assessee is an individual deriving income from pension and during the F.Y 2011-12 executed a development agreement with M/s Sripada Developers, Machilipatnam, for construction of apartment by transferring his land to the said firm vide doc no.42/2012 dated 04.01.2012. Assessee has not filed the return of income for the A.Y 2012-13 admitting the income on LTCG. Accordingly, notice u/s.148 of the Act was issued to the assessee with the prior approval of competent authority and the same was duly served on the assessee. In reply, assessee ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ismissed the appeal of the assessee. 4. Being aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), assessee is in appeal before us by rising the following grounds: - "1. In the facts and circumstances of case, learned CIT (Appeals) erred in observing that the appellant has not made a claim for deduction u/S.54F during the assessment proceedings, but simply submitted that he may be allowed deduction u/s. 54F' ,which is erroneous as per the assessment record, as a specific claim was made by way of letter dt.5.12.2019 before the learned AO, with elaborate submissions and supporting case laws in the assessment proceedings' and learned AO replicated the claim in Para.4 of his assessment order. 2. In the facts and circumstances ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ppeals)'s reliance on Goetz India Ltd. Vs. CIT (Civil Appeal No.1761/2006, SC) was erroneous as the Hon'ble Apex Court has not debarred/ nor held against an appropriate claim for consideration by the CIT(Appeals). 6. In the facts and circumstances of case, learned CIT (Appeals) ought to have considered the appellant submission that the Hon'ble CBDT's binding Circular dt. 14(XL-35) dt.11.4.1955 as per which the officers of the Income-tax Department were instructed to assist the taxpayers and collect only legitimate taxes; this circular reiterates the Constitution Principle that "No tax shall be levied or collected except by authority of law." (Article.265) 7. Even if for a moment, the appellant has not made ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... order of the Ld. CIT(A) may be set-aside. 6. Per contra, Ld. Departmental Representative [hereinafter in short "Ld.DR"] relied on the orders of the Revenue Authorities. 7. We have heard both the sides and perused the material available on record. We observe that similar issue was considered and adjudicated by the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of R. Venkata Dhana Lakshmi v .ITO (supra) and decided the issue in favour of the assessee. While holding so the Coordinate Bench held as under: - "9. We have heard both the parties and perused the material placed on record. There is no doubt that the assessee has entered into development agreement for construction of the flats and sold 4 flats as per the details given in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rairaj. v. Income Tax Officer, ward 4(2)(2), Bangalore. [2021] 124 taxmann.com 243 (Bangalore - Trib.) The coordinate bench in the above case held as under: "6. We have heard both the parties and perused the material on record. The main contention of the ld. DR is that the assessee has not complied with the conditions laid down u/s. 54F(1) or 54F(4) of the Act. U/s. 54F of the Act, when the assessee Invests the sale consideration from transfer either purchasing a residential house or constructing a new house within a period stipulated in Section 54F(1) of the Act, then only the assessee entitles for deduction under this section. In the intermediatery period the assessee shall deposit the amount in an account which is duly notified ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ning the cash, then the said amount is to be invested in the said account. If the intention is not to retain cash but to invest in construction or any purchase of the property and if such investment is made within the period stipulated therein, then Section 54F(4) is not at all attracted and therefore the contention that the assessee has not deposited the amount in the Bank account as stipulated and therefore, he is not entitled to the benefit even though he has invested the money in construction is also not correct." 7. Being so, in our opinion, the Section 54F is beneficial provision and should be interpreted liberally and the Assessing Officer has to see the end utilization of net sale consideration in the way prescribed in Section 54F o....