Case Law Details
Reeva Sood Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi)
ITAT find that the assessee has claimed exemption u/s 54 on account of long term capital gain on account of sale of house property which was invested in the purchase of another property one year ago, that is, the purchase deed was executed on 13.01.2012. The AO had allowed this claim vide in scrutiny assessment vide order passed u/s 143(3). Once the claim has been allowed in scrutiny proceedings, then the AO cannot withdraw the claim u/s 154, by mere change of opinion and without there being any apparent mistake on record. It is well settled proposition that AO cannot review his own order within the limitation and scope of section 154. In any case, there is no mistake apparent on record for the reason that; firstly, the formalities of sale and receiving of the entire sale amount was completed including handing of the possession was duly completed within the period of one year, that is, by the month of November 2012; and only due to some exceptional and unavoidable circumstances, there was a delay in registration which, here in this case. Secondly, it is undisputed fact that assessee has purchased the residential property on 13.01.2012 and assessee can claim exemption u/ 54 if she sale property within one year. Now, if assessee has received the entire sale consideration before one year and handed over the possession, then affectively assessee has transferred the property. If for extreme and unavoidable circumstances there is slight delay in registering the property exemption cannot be denied. Here the delay is only 11 days. Thus, no adverse inference can be drawn to withdraw the exemption. Accordingly, we hold that the exemption allowed by the AO in the original assessment order u/s 143(3) was correct and assessee’s appeal is allowed.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT DELHI
Aforesaid appeal has been filed by the assessee against the impugned order dated 05.03.2018, passed by the ld. CIT(A)-1 1, New Delhi in relation to the proceedings under section 154/143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) for the assessment year 2013- 14.
2. The assessee has filed revised grounds of appeal stating that firstly, ld. CIT (A) has erred in upholding the order of Assessing Officer passed u/s 154 as AO did not have any jurisdiction to rectify the order u/s
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
