Manjit Singh Arora, New Delhi vs Department Of Income Tax

ITO, Ward 37(3) vs. Sh. Manjit Singh Arora New Delhi 115, A 5/B, SFS Flats Paschim Vihar New Delhi 110 063 (Appellant) (Respondent)

Appellant by : Sh.P. Dam Kanunjha, Sr.D.R. Respondent by : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv.

ORDER

PER J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

This is an appeal filed by the Revenue and is directed against the order of the Ld.CIT(A)-XXVIII, New Delhi dated 01.02.2013 pertaining to the Assessment Year 2009-10.

2. Facts of the case:- The facts of the case are brought at paras 2 and 3 of the assessment order which are extracted for ready reference.

"The assessee is a legal professional and derives income from salary, income from business and profession, income from capital gain and from income from other sources.

During the course of assessment proceedings it is noticed that the assessee has sold a property bearing no.144, Avtar Enclave, Paschim Vihar, New Delhi on 27.8.2008 for a sale consideration of Rs.66,00,000/-. After deducting cost of acquisition and cost of improvement (with indexation) total capital gain has been calculated for Rs.53,55,223/- and deduction of the same amount has been claimed by the assessee u/s 54F of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) in his return of income. In support of the deduction claimed u/s 54F of the Act, the assessee has submitted that he has purchased the following property:

2 1. A flat bearing no. M 146, 6 HK Nagar, Paschim Vihar, New Delhi For a consideration of Rs.17,00,000/- on 16.6.2008.

2. A plot at DLF, Phase III, Gurgaon, Haryana for a consideration of Rs.51,00,000/- on 03.09.2008.

As the deduction u/s 54F is applicable on purchase or construction of a house for residential purpose. Hence the claim of the assessee is considered to the extent of Rs.17,00,000/- for which he has purchased a flat is allowed and the balance amount, which has been invested for purchase of plot i.e. Rs.36,55,223/- (53,55,223-17,00,000=36,55,223) is hereby rejected and added back to the total income of the assessee. I am satisfied that the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of his income. Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c ) are initiated on this point. (Disallowance of Rs.36,55,223/-).

With these remarks total income of the assessee computed as under:-

Income as declared in return of income Rs. 1,69,529/-

Disallowance on account of S.54F, as discussed above Rs.36,55,223/-

Total income Rs. 38,24,752/- Taxable income (rounded off) Rs. 38,24,750/-.Assessed at a

total income of Rs.38,24,750/-. Give credit for prepaid taxes and charge interest as per law. Issue demand notice and challan. Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c ) initiated separately."

3. On appeal the First Appellate Authority at para 4 has held as follows.

"The appellant has contended that the plot was purchased for construction of a house and house was constructed there on with in a period of three years. The appellant has claimed exemption u/s 54 and not u/s 54F. The appellant's case fully lies within the provisions of s.54. In view of the circular no.667 and the case laws relied upon by the appellant, I am of the opinion that the appellant is eligible to claim exemption u/s 54F. Accordingly, the disallowance made in the order of assessment of Rs.38,55,223/- is directed to be deleted. The ground raised in appeal is allowed."

4. Aggrieved the Revenue filed this appeal before us on the following grounds.

"1. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld.CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs.38,55,223/- made by the AO on account of disallowance of exemption u/s 54 on purchase of plot since as per the provisions of s.54 of the Act only cost of construction of a residential house will be eligible for the exemption and not on purchase of a plot.

3 2. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld.CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs.38,55,223/- made by the AO on account of disallowance of exemption u/s 54 on purchase of plot since as per the provisions of s.54 of the Act, the exemption of Long Term Capital Gain is allowed to the assessee on purchase of construction of only one residential house whereas in the case of the assessee, exemption was claimed on purchase of plot of land apart from purchase of another residential flat.

3. The appellant craves leave to add, amend or modify the grounds of appeal before or during the course of appeal."

5. Admittedly the assessee is not eligible for exemption u/s 54 of the Act on the investment in flat which was purchased on 16.6.2008 for a consideration of Rs.17 lakhs. Hence to this extent the submissions of the Ld.Sr.D.R. are accepted. As far as exemption u/s 54, for investment in purchase of a plot, the findings of the Ld.CIT(A) in our considered view have to be upheld. The First Appellate Authority has rightly observed that the section relevant is S.54 and not S.54F of the Act. He rightly accepted the claim of the assessee basing himself on circular no.667 issued by the CBDT. Thus the contentions of the Revenue are to be rejected and the order of the First Appellate Authority has to be accepted to this extent. In the result the appeal of the Revenue is allowed in part.

6. In the result the appeal filed by the Revenue stands partly allowed. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 08th May, , 2015.

Sd/- Sd/- (C.M. GARG) (J.SUDHAKAR REDDY) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Dated: the 08th May, 2015

*manga 4

Copy of the Order forwarded to:

1.Appellant; 2.Respondent; 3.CIT; 4.CIT(A); 5.DR; 6.Guard File

By Order

Asst. Registrar