Case Law Details
M M Pandit HUF Vs ACIT (ITAT Lucknow)
ITAT Lucknow held that benefit of exemption cannot be disallowed merely because the same was claimed u/s 54F of the Income Tax Act instead of claiming u/s 54 of the Income Tax Act. Such mistake is inadvertent and typographical mistake.
Facts- The assessee has sold a residential house & invested the amount in purchase of residential flat. The assessee claimed benefit u/s 54F of the Act in the return of income. AO disallowed the claimed with a view that the assessee claimed benefit erroneously u/s 54F of Act instead of claiming the benefit u/s 54 of Act which was the correct section under which the assessee was eligible for benefit, and made the addition of Rs.1,05,00,000/-.
CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Being aggrieved, assessee preferred the present appeal.
Conclusion- We hold that the conclusion arrived by learned CIT(A) and the Assessing Officer that the assessee’s claim u/s 54 of IT Act is a new claim is, factually wrong in the specific facts and circumstances of the present appeal before us. The assessee had already made this claim in the return of income, although, in an inadvertent and bonafide typographical mistake, the section under which the benefit was claimed, was erroneously mentioned as 54F instead of section 54 which is the correct section. Thus, we direct the Assessing Officer to compute benefit u/s 54 of IT Act on merits, having regard to applicable law and relevant facts and circumstances; and we order the Assessing Officer to allow assessee’s claim u/s 54 of IT Act accordingly.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
