TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (2) TMI 2160
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....11 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-32, Mumbai [hereinafter referred to as the "CIT(A)"] relevant to the assessment years 2008-09. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds: - "Being aggrieved by the orders of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal) - 32 and Assessing Officer, 21 (1) - 3, Mumbai, this appeal petition is filed on the following amongst other grounds of appeal, which it is prayed may be considered without prejudice to one another 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal) erred in upholding action of the Assessing Officer in refusing to allow exemption u/s. 54F and treating Long Term Capital Gain of RS. 8,909,66....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....case are that the assessee filed his return of income on 31.03.2010 declaring total income to the tune of Rs.15,125/-. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS. Notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued and served upon the assessee on 23.08.2010. Notice u/s 142(1) of the act was issued on 09.09.2010 and served upon the assessee. The assessee is an individual. The assessee has shown the total income to the tune of Rs.15,125/-. The assessee earned long term capital gain of Rs. 74,09,100/- and claimed exemption u/s 54F of the Act. On verification, it was found that the assessee invested an amount of Rs. 90,00,000/- in a Flat at CBD Belapur in the building built by M/s. Welvan Securities Pvt. Ltd. at 86A, Sector II, CBD, Belapur, Navi Mumbai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oduced the receipt before the Assessing Officer. The company did not start the construction till 2011. Even the controversy of the assessee along with others with the builders is pending before the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay by virtue of suit no. 275 of 2011 and copy of which lies at page no. 18 to 45 of the paper book. It is not in dispute that the assessee sold the property in the relevant assessment year and invested an amount of Rs. 90,00,000/- on 31.10.2010 by virtue of cheque no.337130 dated 31.10.2007 of HSBC Bank with the Welvan Securities Pvt. Ltd. for the allotment of flat. Investment is not in dispute. The claim of the assessee was declined on the basis of the non-construction of the flat. Now it is to be seen whether in the sa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ich the assessee is not at fault.. The provision contained in Section 54F of the Act is a beneficial provision for promoting construction of residential houses therefore, in the said provision has to be construed library for achieving the purpose for which it was in cooperated statute. The intention of the legislature was to encourage the investment in the acquisition of the residential house and completion of construction or occupation is not the requirement of the law Therefore, in the said circumstances, the claim of the assessee u/s 54 F of the Act is not liable to be declined. Accordingly, we are of the view that the finding of the CIT(A) is wrong against law and facts and is not liable to be sustainable in the eyes of law. Therefor....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed with his part of performance of making investment in a residential house as well as by resorting to appropriate legal remedies against the developer, and fault for non-completion of construction was attributable to the factors beyond his control in so much so that, the lower authorities were expecting him to do something impossible. 2. On the facts, and in circumstances of the case, and in law, learned Commissioner of income-lax (Appeal) erred in upholding order of the Assessing Officer in levying penalty under section 271 (1) (c) of the Income-tax Act 1961 on the cost of improvement without appreciating that, though your Appellant could not furnish the supporting documents for cost of improvement, your Appellant was not benefit....