Case Law Details
Shri Kasi Viswanathan Ramnathan Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai)
The issue under consideration is whether the denial of exemption under section 54F by CIT(A) is justified in law?
In the present case, assessee has claimed the exemption u/s 54F in the return including the amount which had not been utilized before 31.07.2012. But later the assessee utilized the entire sale consideration in the construction of the building within the time limit specified under Section 54F. But still CIT(A) disallowed the exemption u/s 54F.
ITAT after observing the facts of the case, stated that mere non compliance of a procedural requirement u/s 54(2) itself cannot stand in way of assessee in getting benefit under Section 54, if he is, otherwise, in a position to satisfy that mandatory requirement under Section 54(1) is fully complied with within time limit prescribed therein. Therefore, ITAT direct the A.O. to allow the total investments made by the assessee under Section 54F of the Act after satisfying whether the impugned investment was utilized for the construction of the house within the time limit specified under Section 54F of the Act.
Accordingly, the appeal of assessee is treated as allowed.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
