Sundaresan Vralakshmi , CHENNAI V. ACIT Non Corporate Circle 6 , CHENNAI

ITA 2036/CHNY/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4961 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-01-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 22-08-2017
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: S PONRAJ
• Keywords: Reopening of assessment; Capital asset; Retrospective amendment; Tangible material
• Section: 54F

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , A B ENCH, CHENNAI . . . , . , BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ I.T.A.NO.2036/MDS/2017 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12) SMT. SUNDARESAN VARALAKSHMI, NEW NO.19, OLD NO.8/1, LOTUS RAMASWAMY STREET, ROYAPURAM, CHENNAI 600 013. VS THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 6, CHENNAI 600 096. PAN: AAGPV2246R ( /APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) /ASSESSEE BY : SHRI S. PONRAJ, CA /REVENUE BY : SHRI AR.V. SREENIVASAN, JCIT /DATE OF HEARING : 21.12.2017 !' /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 23.01.2018 / O R D E R PER A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, AM:- THE APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A PPEALS)-5, CHENNAI DATED 01.06.2017 IN ITA NO.180/CIT(A)-5/16- 17 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 PASSED U/S.250(6) R.W.S. 14 3(3) & 147 OF THE ACT. 2 ITA NO. 2036/MDS/201 7 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOUR ELABORATE GROUNDS IN HER APPEAL HOWEVER THE CRUXES OF THE ISSUES ARE AS FOLL OWS:- (I) REOPENING OF ASSESSMENT U/S.147/148 OF THE ACT IS BAD IN LAW BECAUSE IT WAS BASED ON TRANSFER OF LAND DURING THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR THOUGH IN THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR THERE WAS NO TRANSFER OF LAND WITHI N THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 2(47) OF THE ACT. (II) THE LD.CIT(A) HAD ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ORDE R OF LD.AO WHO HAD HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD TRANSFERRED HER LAND DURING THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 BASED ON THE SAL E AGREEMENT DATED 08.03.2011. (III) THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ORD ER OF LD.AO WHO HAD ERRONEOUSLY INCLUDED THE COST OF THE UNDIVI DED INTEREST IN LAND RETAINED BY THE ASSESSEE WITH RESP ECT TO THE SIX RESIDENTIAL FLATS ALLOTTED TO HER BY THE DE VELOPER AS PART OF SALE CONSIDERATION. (IV) THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ORDE R OF LD.AO WHO HAD NOT GRANTED DEDUCTION U/S.54F OF THE ACT FO R RS.2,59,39,307/-. 3 ITA NO. 2036/MDS/201 7 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSE E IS AN INDIVIDUAL ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF SALE OF BOOKS AND UNDERTAKING JOB WORK FOR BINDING BOOKS, FILED HER R ETURN OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 ON 18.02.2012. SUBS EQUENTLY, DURING THE COURSE OF SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT FOR THE AS SESSMENT YEAR 2013-14, IT WAS OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD DISC LOSED LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN AS NIL IN HER RETURN OF INCOME WITH RESPECT TO THE LAND TRANSFERRED BY HER IN SURVEY NO.276, VELACHERY VILLAGE, MAMBALAM-GUINDY TALUK, CHENNAI DISTRICT. HOWEVER IT WAS REVEALED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD ENTERED INTO AN AGRE EMENT OF SALE ON 08.03.2011 WITH RESPECT TO THE SAME PROPERTY FOR SALE CONSIDERATION OF RS.6,60,00,000/-. THEREFORE THE AS SESSMENT WAS REOPENED U/S.147/148 OF THE ACT FOR THE RELEVANT AS SESSMENT YEAR 2011-12. THEREAFTER THE LD.AO ASSESSED LONG TERM CA PITAL GAIN IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE AS RS.5,81,18,565/-. ON A PPEAL THE LD.CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF THE LD.AO. 4. GROUND NO.2(I): REOPENING OF ASSESSMENT U/S. 147/14 8 OF THE ACT:- THE LD.AR SUBMITTED BEFORE US THAT THE REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT FOR THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 IS BAD IN 4 ITA NO. 2036/MDS/201 7 LAW BECAUSE IT WAS ON THE BASIS OF AN ERRONEOUS FIN DING THAT THE LAND TRANSFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS DURING THE PRE VIOUS YEAR 2010-11. WE DO NOT FIND ANY MERIT IN THE ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE LD.AR BECAUSE DURING THE COURSE OF SCRUTINY ASS ESSMENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 IT WAS REVEALED THAT TH E ASSESSEE HAD ENTERED INTO AGREEMENT FOR SALE OF A PROPERTY O N 08.03.2011 WHICH IS RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12. T HEREFORE FRESH TANGIBLE MATERIALS HAD SURFACED BEFORE THE REVENUE BASED ON WHICH THE LD.AO WAS DUTY BOUND TO REOPEN THE CASE O F THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12. HENCE THI S GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE DEVOID OF MERIT AND IT IS DI SPOSED OFF ACCORDINGLY. 5. GROUND NO.2(II): ASCERTAINING THE PERIOD OF TRANSF ER OF ASSET FOR ASSESSING LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN:- THE LD.AO HAD OBSERVED IN HIS ORDER THAT THE ASSE SSEE HAD ENTERED INTO A SALE AGREEMENT WITH M/S. INDU HOUSING DEVELOPMENT (CHENNAI) PVT. LTD., FOR TOTAL SALE CON SIDERATION OF RS.6,66,00,000/- ON 08.03.2011. THE PURCHASER HAD P AID AN ADVANCE OF RS.10,00,000/- AND HAD FURTHER AGREED TO PAY AND THE 5 ITA NO. 2036/MDS/201 7 ASSESSEE HAD AGREED TO RECEIVE THE BALANCE SALE CON SIDERATION AS FOLLOWS:- 1. RS.15,00,000/- ON OR BEFORE 25.03.2011 2. RS.50,00,000/- WITHIN 10 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF O BTAINING PLAN SANCTION. 3. BALANCE SALE CONSIDERATION OF RS.5,91,00,000/- P ROPORTIONATE TO THE INDIVIDUAL SHARES / SHARES TO BE CONVEYED AN D TILL COMPLETION OF THE FULL CONSIDERATION. IT WAS ALSO STATED IN THE SALE AGREEMENT DATE 08.03 .2011 THAT THE VENDOR HAS DELIVERED POSSESSION ON THE DATE OF EXEC UTION OF THE AGREEMENT. BASED ON THE ABOVE AGREEMENT, THE LD.AO OPINED THAT AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 2(47)(V) OF T HE ACT AND SECTION 53A OF THE TRANSFER OF PROPERTY ACT, 1982, THE TRANSFER OF PROPERTY HAS TAKEN PLACE ON 08.03.2011 FOR THE PURP OSE OF DETERMINING LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN. ACCORDINGLY THE LD.AO HELD THAT LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN HAS ACCRUED TO THE ASSE SSEE IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12. THE LD.CIT(A) ALSO AGREED WITH THE VIEW OF THE LD.AO. 6 ITA NO. 2036/MDS/201 7 5.1 BEFORE US THE LD.AR SUBMITTED THAT THE PROPERTY WAS VESTED WITH LIFE INTEREST OF HER FATHER MR.M. KUPPU RANGAM WHO HAD EARLIER CONVEYED THE PROPERTY TO THE ASSESSEE B Y WAY OF SETTLEMENT DEED DATED 18.08.2008 WHEREIN HE RETAINE D LIFE INTEREST ON THE PROPERTY. THE LD.AR FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT T HE SALE AGREEMENT EXECUTED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 08.03.2011 IS NOT VALID BECAUSE THE PROPERTY WAS ENCUMBERED WITH THE LIFE I NTEREST OF HER FATHER. THEREFORE THE POSSESSION HANDED OVER BY THE ASSESSEE TO THE PURCHASER IN LIEU OF THE SALE AGREEMENT IS NOT VALID AS ON 08.03.2011. HENCE IT CANNOT BE CONSTRUED THAT TRANS FER OF PROPERTY HAD TAKEN PLACE DURING THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12. THE LD.AR FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD OBTAINED A RELEASE DEED FROM HER FATHER WITH RESPECT TO HIS LIFE INTEREST I N THE PROPERTY ON 22.03.2012. IT WAS THEREFORE SUBMITTED THAT THE PUR CHASER OF THE PROPERTY ENJOYED LEGAL RIGHTFUL POSSESSION ONLY FRO M 22.03.2012. THE LD.AR FURTHER ARGUED STATING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD ONLY GIVEN SYMBOLIC POSSESSION OF PROPERTY TO THE PURCHA SER AND NOT CONSTRUCTIVE POSSESSION. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD EXECUTED GENERAL POWER OF ATTORNEY TO THE PURCH ASER OF THE PROPERTY ON 02.05.2012 I.E., AFTER THE RELEASE DEED EXECUTED BY HER FATHER. IT WAS THEREFORE ARGUED THAT THE YEAR O F TRANSFER SHOULD 7 ITA NO. 2036/MDS/201 7 BE TAKEN AS ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14. THE LD.D.R ON THE OTHER HAND ARGUED IN SUPPORT OF THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A ). 5.2 WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND CAREFUL LY PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. FROM THE FACTS OF THE CASE IT IS APPARENT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED AN ADVANCE OF RS.10 LAKHS BY VIRTUE OF THE AGREEMENT OF SALE DATED 08.03.2011. V IDE THE SAME AGREEMENT THE ASSESSEE HAD DELIVERED POSSESSION OF THE PROPERTY TO THE BUYER. HOWEVER AS POINTED OUT BY THE LD.AR O N THAT DATE THE PROPERTY WAS ENCUMBERED WITH THE LIFE INTEREST OF THE ASSESSEES FATHER BECAUSE IN THE SETTLEMENT DEED DA TED 18.08.2008 EXECUTED BY THE ASSESSEES FATHER HE HAD RETAINED HIS LIFE INTEREST AND ONLY BY VIRTUE OF THAT SETTLEMENT DEED THE ASSESSEE HAD BECOME OWNER OF THE PROPERTY. THEREFOR E, THOUGH THE ASSESSEE HAD HANDED OVER POSSESSION TO THE PURC HASER ON 08.03.2011, THE PURCHASER OF THE PROPERTY DID NOT E NJOY ABSOLUTE POSSESSION OF THE PROPERTY. MOREOVER THE AGREEMENT OF SALE EXECUTED BY THE ASSESSEE ITSELF IS VOID AB-INITIO B ECAUSE THE ASSESSEES FATHER HAD LIFE INTEREST ON THE PROPERTY . HENCE IT CANNOT BE CONSTRUED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD HANDED OVER POSS ESSION OF THE PROPERTY ON 08.03.2011 TO THE PURCHASER OF THE PROPERTY IN 8 ITA NO. 2036/MDS/201 7 LEGAL PARLANCE. THIS LACUNA WAS SUBSEQUENTLY CURED BY WAY OF EXECUTING RELEASE DEED ON 22.03.2012 BY THE FATHER OF THE ASSESSEE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE IT CA N BE CONSTRUED THAT THE ABSOLUTE POSSESSION OF THE PROPERTY IS ENJ OYED BY THE PURCHASER OF THE PROPERTY FROM 22.03.2012 FOR THE P URPOSE OF COMPUTING CAPITAL GAIN UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT WHICH IS RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 THOUGH THE SALE AGREEMENT DATED 08.03.2011 BECOMES LEGALLY VALID FR OM THE DATE OF EXECUTION DUE TO THE LACUNA BEING CURED BECAUSE OF THE RELEASE DEED EXECUTED BY THE ASSESSEES FATHER ON 22.03.201 2. IT IS PERTINENT TO MENTION THAT CAPITAL GAIN CANNOT BE AS SESSED IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011- 12 AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT BECAUSE AS ON 31.03.2011 THE TRANSFER OF PROPERTY HAS NOT CRYSTALIZED. FURTHER ONLY AFTER TH E EXECUTION OF THE RELEASE DEED DATED 22.03.2012 BY THE FATHER OF THE ASSESSEE THE TRANSFER OF PROPERTY HAS BECOME LEGALLY VALID W ITH RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT FROM 08.03.2011 AND BY THEN THE TIME LIMIT F OR FILING THE RETURN OF INCOME BY THE ASSESSEE U/S. 139(1) OF THE ACT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 WHICH IS EITHER ON 30.09.20 11 OR 31.07.2011 HAS LAPSED. HENCE WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT FOR THE PURPOSE OF SECTION 2(47) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, SIN CE THE 9 ITA NO. 2036/MDS/201 7 ASSESSEE HAD HANDED OVER ABSOLUTE RIGHT OF POSSESSI ON ON 22.03.2012, CAPITAL GAIN WITH RESPECT TO THE TRANSF ER OF PROPERTY WOULD BE ASSESSABLE IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13. IT IS PERTINENT TO MENTION THAT THE AGREEMENT OF SALE DAT ED 08.03.2011, DEED OF SETTLEMENT DATED 18.08.2008 AND RELEASE DEE D DATED 22.03.2012 ARE NOT IN DISPUTE. ACCORDINGLY IN THIS SITUATION BY VIRTUE OF SECTION 2(47) OF THE ACT COUPLED WITH 53A OF THE TRANSFER OF PROPERTY ACT, 1982 WE HEREBY HOLD THAT THE LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN CAN BE ASSESSED IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE O NLY FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 AND NOT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011- 12 AS HELD BY THE LD.REVENUE AUTHORITIES. 6. GROUND NO.2(III): ERRONEOUSLY INCLUDING THE COST OF THE UNDIVIDED INTEREST IN LAND RETAINED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE SALE CONSIDERATION FOR DETERMINING LONG TERM CAPITA L GAIN:- THE LD.AR SUBMITTED BEFORE US THAT IN THE AGREEME NT OF SALE DATED 08/03/2011 THE TOTAL SALE CONSIDERATION WAS WRONGLY STATED AS RS.6,66,00,000/-. FURTHER OUT OF THE TOTA L EXTENT OF LAND OF 14,543 SQ.FT., 3,458 SQ.FT., OF LAND WAS RETAINE D BY THE ASSESSEE WHICH IS ASSIGNED TO THE SIX FLAT ALLOTTED TO THE A SSESSEE AGGREGATING TO 6,800 SQ.FT. THEREFORE THE ACTUAL L AND SOLD BY THE ASSESSEE IS ONLY 11,085 SQ.FT., (14,543 3,458) AN D NOT 14,543 SQ.FT.,LAND AS HELD BY THE LD.REVENUE AUTHORITIES. IT WAS THEREFORE 10 ITA NO. 2036/MDS/20 17 ARGUED THAT THE ACTUAL SALE CONSIDERATION RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE HAS TO BE ADAPTED AS RS. 3,93,00,000/- AS ILLUSTRATED HEREIN BELOW :- ADVANCE RECEIVED RS.10,00,000/- ADVANCE RECEIVED RS.15,00,000/- RS. 25,00,000/ - BANK PAYMENTS RECD. IN AY 2013-14 RS.2,25,00,000/- IN AY 2014-15 RS. 75,00,000/- ESTIMATED COST OF CONSTRUCTION FOR 6800SQ.FT. @ RS.1000/- PER SQ.FT. RS. 68,00,000/- TOTAL RS.3,93,00,000/- ========== THE LD.AR FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE LD.REVENUE AUT HORITIES DRAWING STRENGTH FROM THE AGREEMENT OF SALE DATED 0 8.03.2011 EXECUTED BY THE ASSESSEE, WHEREIN THE SALE CONSIDER ATION WAS WRONGLY MENTIONED AS RS.6,66,00,000/- ERRONEOUSLY A SSESSED THE SALE CONSIDERATION IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE AS RS.6,66,00,000/- BY INFERRING AS FOLLOWS: ADVANCE RECEIVED RS.10,00,000/- ADVANCE RECEIVED RS.15,00,000/- RS. 25,00,000/ - BANK PAYMENTS RECD. IN AY 2013-14 RS.2,25,00,000/- IN AY 2014-15 RS. 75,00,000/- COST OF FLAT AGGREGATING TO 6800 SQ.FT. ALLOTTED TO THE ASSESSEE @ RS.5000/- PER SQ.FT. (COST OF UNDIVIDED INTEREST IN LAND RS.4900/- PER S Q.FT. COST OF CONSTRUCTION RS.1000/- PER SQ.FT.) RS.3,40,00,000/- MISCELLANEOUS RECEIPT RS. 1,00,000/- TOTAL RS.6,66,00,000/- ============ 11 ITA NO. 2036/MDS/20 17 6.1 THE LD.AR ARGUED BY STATING THAT THE VALUE OF T HE LAND OF 3,458 SQ.FT., RETAINED BY THE ASSESSEE CANNOT BE TR EATED AS THE SALE CONSIDERATION RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE BECAUSE THIS AMOUNT WAS NEVER RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE. HE FURTHER REIT ERATED THAT THE SALE CONSIDERATION MENTIONED IN THE AGREEMENT OF SA LE DATED 08.03.2011 IS ERRONEOUS AND THEREFORE THE SAME SHOU LD NOT BE CONSIDERED. IT WAS THEREFORE PLEADED THAT THE ACTUA L SALE CONSIDERATION RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE AS EXPLAINED HEREIN ABOVE SHOULD BE TREATED AS THE SALE CONSIDERATION F OR THE TRANSFER OF THE LAND EXTENDING TO 11,085 SQ.FT. 6.2 THE LD.DR ON THE OTHER HAND RELIED ON THE ORDER S OF THE LD.REVENUE AUTHORITIES. 6.3 WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND CAREFUL LY PERUSED THE MATERIALS ON RECORD. ON PERUSING THE AGREEMENT OF SALE DATED 08.03.2011, WE FIND THAT THE CLAUSE 7 STATES AS F OLLOWS: IN CASE THE VENDOR AGREES TO PURCHASE SOME PORTION OF THE B UILT UP AREA IN THE LAND WHICH SHALL BE AT THE RATE OF RS.5,000/- P ER SQ.FT. IF THE OPTION IS EXERCISED BY THE VENDOR THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF PURCHASE 12 ITA NO. 2036/MDS/20 17 VALUE OF FLAT SHALL BE ADJUSTED FROM TOTAL SALE CON SIDERATION PAYABLE BY THE PURCHASER TO THE VENDOR. FROM THE ABOVE, IT IS EVIDENT THAT THE RATE OF RS.5,000/- PER SQ.FT., ALS O INCLUDES THE LAND COST. IF THE LAND COST IS TAKEN AS RS.4,000/- PER S Q.FT., IT IS A CASE WHERE THE ASSESSEE HAS SOLD THE LAND OF 14,543 SQ.F T., TO THE PROMOTER FOR RS.4,000/- PER SQ.FT., AND RE-PURCHASE D THE RETAINED PORTION OF LAND OF 3,458 SQ.FT., AT THE RATE OF RS. 4,000/- PER SQ.FT., WHICH IS ABSURD. IN FACT THE CORRECT INFERENCE WOUL D BE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SOLD ONLY 11,085 SQ.FT., (14,543 3,4 58) OF LAND AND NOT 14,543 SQ.FT., OF LAND AS HELD BY THE LD.REVENU E AUTHORITIES THEREFORE THE VALUE OF 3458 SQ.FT., OF LAND RETAINE D BY THE ASSESSEE HAS TO BE EXCLUDED WHILE ARRIVING AT THE S ALE CONSIDERATION RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE. THUS WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE NEGLIGIBLE FLAW IN CLAUSE 2 AND CLAUSE 7 OF THE AGREEMENT OF SALE DATED 08.03.2011 NEEDS TO BE IGNO RED AND INTERPRETED IN THE CORRECT PROSPECTIVE. HENCE THOUG H WE FIND MERIT IN THE EXPLANATION OFFERED BY THE LD.AR HEREIN ABOV E WITH RESPECT TO THE CORRECT SALE CONSIDERATION OF RS.3,93,00,000 /- RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE HEREBY REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF LD.AO IN ORDER TO VERIFY THE CO RRECT VALUE OF SALE CONSIDERATION AS PRESENTED BY THE LD.AR HEREIN ABOV E AND PASS 13 ITA NO. 2036/MDS/20 17 APPROPRIATE ORDER IN ACCORDANCE WITH MERIT AND LAW KEEPING IN VIEW OF OUR OBSERVATIONS BROUGHT OUT HEREIN ABOVE. 7. GROUND NO.2(IV): DEDUCTION OF RS.2,59,39,307/- U/S. 54F OF THE ACT:- AT THE OUTSET THE LD.AR SUBMITTED BEFORE US THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED DEDUCTION U/S.54F OF THE ACT, FOR RS.2,59,39,307/-. HOWEVER THE LD.AO DID NOT GRANT T HE BENEFIT OF DEDUCTION TO THE ASSESSEE U/S.54F OF THE ACT. ON PE RUSING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, WE FIND THAT THE LD.AO HAS NEITHE R GRANTED DEDUCTION WITH RESPECT TO THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/ S.54F OF THE ACT NOR PASSED A SPEAKING ORDER ON THAT ISSUE. FURT HER WE FIND THAT THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ALSO NOT DISCUSSED THE ISSUE IN HIS ORDER. THEREFORE WE HEREBY REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO THE FI LE OF LD.AO IN ORDER TO VERIFY WHETHER THE ASSESSEE IS ELIGIBLE FO R CLAIMING DEDUCTION U/S.54F OF THE ACT FOR RS.2,59,39,307/- A DMITTING THIS GROUND RAISED BEFORE US EVEN IF IT RAISE FOR THE FI RST TIME, THEREAFTER PASS APPROPRIATE SPEAKING ORDER IN ACCOR DANCE WITH LAW AND MERIT. WHILE ARRIVING AT OUR DECISION HEREI N ABOVE WE PLACE RELIANCE IN THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE APEX COURT IN THE CASE NATIONAL THERMAL POWER CO. LTD., V/S., CIT REP ORTED IN 229 14 ITA NO. 2036/MDS/20 17 ITR 383 AND GOETZE (INDIA) LTD., V/S., CIT REPORTED IN 284 ITR 254. 8. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PART LY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSED AS INDICATED HEREIN ABOVE. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THE 23 RD JANUARY, 2018 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . . . ) (N.R.S. GANESAN) /JUDICIAL MEMBER ( . ) (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER #$ /CHENNAI, %& /DATED 23 RD JANUARY, 2018 RSR & () *) /COPY TO: 1. /APPELLANT 2. /RESPONDENT 3. - ( )/CIT(A) 4. - /CIT 5. )./ 0 /DR 6. /1 /GF