Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Mrs. A. Vijayakumari Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai)
Appeal Number : I.T.A. No. 3435/Chny/2018
Date of Judgement/Order : 26/07/2019
Related Assessment Year : 2014-15
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Mrs. A. Vijayakumari Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai)

The provisions of section 54 of the Act are beneficial and are to be considered liberally for reasonable bonafide cause but investment in residential property is mandatory which is not in dispute in this case. The Assessing Officer was not justified in rejecting the case law relied on by the assessee in the case of CIT v. Shri Kamal Wahal 351 ITR 4 (Del), wherein, it was held that the new residential house need not be purchased by the assessee in his own name nor is it necessary that it should be purchased exclusively in his name. Claiming exemption under section 54(1) of the Act deals with transfer of a long term capital asset being building or lands appurtenant, whereas, section 54F of the Act deals with transfer of any long term capital asset not being a residential house, but both are coming under computation of income from capital gains.  Under these facts and circumstances, the long term capital gains taxed by the Assessing Officer stands deleted.

FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGEMENT

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) 1, Trichy, dated 27.11.2018 relevant to the assessment year 2014-15. In the grounds of appeal, the assessee has challenged the order of the ld. CIT(A) on confirmation of both income from long term capital gains and short term capital gains.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and filed her return of income for the assessment year 2014-15 on 23.02.2016 admitting income of Rs. 3,57,400/-. As per the information available with the Department that the assessee sold an immovable property (land & building) for a sale consideration of Rs.42,68,880/- as against the guideline value of Rs.44,69,000/- during the financial year 2013-14. As the said transaction attracts the provision of section 50C and for the reason that the assessee has declared the sale value in her capital gain workings at Rs. 42,68,880/-instead of Rs. 44,69,000/-, a notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] was issued. In response, the assessee filed a reply dated 16.06.2017 requesting to treat the return filed by her on 23.02.2016 as the one filed in response to notice under section 148 of the Act. After considering the details furnished by the assessee against the statutory notices, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act by assessing total income of the assessee at Rs.40,59,160/- after making various additions. On appeal, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the additions.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031