Kasi Viswanathan Ramanathan, CHENNAI V. ITO Non Corporate Ward 16(4), CHENNAI

ITA 2040/CHNY/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1236 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 9 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-05-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 23-08-2017
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A SUNDARARAJANADDL
• Assessee Lawyers: K VIGNESHC A
• Keywords: Capital Gains
• Section: 54F; 139(1)

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH : CHENNAI . , ! , BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI S.JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A .NO. 2040 /CHNY/ 2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13 SHRI KASI VISWANATHAN RAMNATHAN , PLOT NO.1,SWATHI,RAJAKILPAKKAM SARASWATHI NAGAR,MAIN ROAD, CHENNAI 600 073. VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON CORPORATE WARD -16(4), CHENNAI 600 034. [ PAN AGIPR 0543 H ] ( '# / APPELLANT) ( $%'# /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : MR.K.VIGNESH,C.A /RESPONDENT BY : MR.A.SUNDARARAJAN,ADDL.CIT D.R ! / DATE OF HEARING : 05 - 03 - 20 20 '#$% ! / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 29 - 05 - 20 20 &' / O R D E R PER S.JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THE ASSESSEE FILED THIS APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-4, CHENNAI IN ITA NO.47/205-16/A.Y2012-13/CIT(A)-4, DATED 27.06.2017 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13. ITA NO.2040/CHNY/2017 :- 2 -: 2. SHRI KASI VISWANATHAN RAMNATHAN , THE ASSESSEE IS A SALARIED INDIVIDUAL. THE ASSESSEE ALONG WITH LEGAL HEIRS REC EIVED HIS SHARE ON SALE OF PROPERTY MADE ON 23 RD DECEMBER, 2011, BUT HE RECEIVED ON THE CONSIDERATION ON 16.01.2012. THE ASSESSEE ACQUIRED A LAND FOR .59,95,000 ON 05.03.2012 AND CONSTRUCTED A RESIDEN TIAL PROPERTY ON THE SAME WITHIN THE TIME STIPULATED UNDER SECTION 5 4F OF THE ACT AND CLAIMED DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 54F IN THE RETURN F ILED FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13. THE A.O RESTRICTED THE EXEMPTIONS TO THE EXPENSES INCURRED TILL 31.07.2012, AS THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO INVEST UNUTILIZED PORTION IN CAPITAL GAINS DEPOSIT SCHEME. AGGRIEVED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. A.O., THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFOR E THE CIT(A). THE LEARNED CIT(A) DISMISSED THE APPEAL. AGGRIEVED AGAI NST THAT ORDER, THE ASSESSEE FILED THIS APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 3. THE LD. A.R. SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE INVESTED T HE CAPITAL GAINS WITHIN THE TIME STIPULATED UNDER SECTION 54F OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE OUT OF ABUNDANT CAUTION ALSO FILED HIS RET URN OF INCOME WITHIN THE DUE DATE SPECIFIED UNDER SECTION 139(1) OF THE ACT CLAIMING EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 54F OF THE ACT INCLUDING TH E AMOUNT WHICH HAD NOT BEEN UTILIZED BEFORE 31.07.2012. THE ASSESS EE UTILIZED THE ENTIRE SALE CONSIDERATION IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF TH E BUILDING WITHIN THE ITA NO.2040/CHNY/2017 :- 3 -: TIME LIMIT SPECIFIED UNDER SECTION.54F OF THE ACT. THE LD. A.R. RELIED ON THE FOLLOWING CASE LAWS: I) HONBLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF C.I .T VS. SHRI K.RAMACHANDRA RAO REPORTED IN [2015] 56 TAXMANN.COM 163(KARNATAKA) II) MUMBAI TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF KISHORE, [2012] 24 TAXMANN.COM 11 III) HONBLE MADRAS HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF VENKA TA DILIP KUMAR [2019] 111 TAXMANN.COM 180(MADRAS) FURTHER, THE LD. A.R. PLEADED THAT THE ASSESSEES A PPEAL BE ALLOWED. 4. PER CONTRA, LD. D.R. SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF TH E LOWER AUTHORITIES. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. AFTER EXAMINING THE FACTS AND CASE LAWS RELIED ON BY THE ASSESSEE, WE FIND THAT MERE NON CO MPLIANCE OF A PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENT UNDER SECTION 54(2) ITSELF CANNOT STAND IN WAY OF ASSESSEE IN GETTING BENEFIT UNDER SECTION 54, IF HE IS, OTHERWISE, IN A POSITION TO SATISFY THAT MANDATORY REQUIREMENT UNDE R SECTION 54(1) IS FULLY COMPLIED WITH WITHIN TIME LIMIT PRESCRIBED TH EREIN. THEREFORE, WE DIRECT THE A.O. TO ALLOW THE TOTAL INVESTMENTS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE UNDER SECTION 54F OF THE ACT AFTER SATISFYING WHET HER THE IMPUGNED ITA NO.2040/CHNY/2017 :- 4 -: INVESTMENT WAS UTILIZED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE HOUSE WITHIN THE TIME LIMIT SPECIFIED UNDER SECTION 54F OF THE ACT. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 29 TH MAY, 2020 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . ) (DUVVURU RL REDDY) ( &) /JUDICIAL MEMBER ( ! ) (S. JAYARAMAN) /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & / CHENNAI ' / DATED: 29 TH MAY,2020. K S SUNDARAM ( ) *+ , +$ / COPY TO: 1 . / APPELLANT 4. ( ( - / CIT 2. / RESPONDENT 5. +./ 01 / DR 3. ( ( - () / CIT(A) 6. /45 6 / GF