Case Law Details
Case Name : Income-tax Officer Vs. M/s Polestar Industries (ITAT Ahmedabad)
Appeal Number : ITA No. 1944/Ahd/2010
Date of Judgement/Order : 31/01/2013
Related Assessment Year : 2007- 2008
Courts :
All ITAT ITAT Ahmedabad
Become a Premium member to Download.
If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored
Following the decision of ACE Builders (P) 28 ITR 2000(Bom) and Assam Petroleum Industries Pvt Ltd 262 ITR 58 (Gau). It was held that Section 54E does not make any distinction between the depreciable assets and non-depreciable assets, therefore, the investment u/s 54E is a permissible investment.
With this factual as also legal background, we have heard both the sides. We are of the considered view that the issue as raised by the Revenue Department in the grounds of appeal that whether the capital gain as computed u/s 50 of IT Act qualifies for the exemption if investment is made out of the sale proceeds towards prescribed bonds u/s 54EC of I.T. Act. Now, this question is very well settled by the Hon’ble Court and following the said decision we hereby confirm that there was no fallacy in the finding of CIT(A), the same is hereby confirmed and the grounds are dismissed.
ITAT AHMEDABAD “D” BENCH
ITA No. 1944/Ahd/2010
A.Y. : -2007-2008
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Sponsored
Kindly Refer to
Privacy Policy &
Complete Terms of Use and Disclaimer.
I think the ITAT has missed out an important aspect that sec 54EC is only against sale of Long Term Capital Gains whereas capital gains arising under section 50 is always short term. So how can exe,ption u/s 54EC be claimed for short term capital gains arising under sec 50