GOVINDASAMY ASHWIN, CHENNAI V. ITONCW 10(1), CHENNAI

ITA 3112/CHNY/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4148 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-03-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 14-11-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Capital Gains
• Section: 13

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH: CHENNAI , ! . , ! ' BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.3112/CHNY/2018 /ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2015-16 SHRI GOVINDASAMY ASHWIN, NO.13-A, KUPPAMANI THOPPE, REDHILLS, CHENNAI-600 052. [PAN: AGSPA 6431 B] VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON-CORPORATE WARD-10(1), CHENNAI. ( ) /APPELLANT) ( *+) /RESPONDENT) ) , / APPELLANT BY : MR.S.VENUGOPALAN, CA *+) , /RESPONDENT BY : MR.SRIDHAR DORA, JCIT , /DATE OF HEARING : 13.03.2019 , /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 13.03.2019 / O R D E R PER GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-12, CHENNAI, I N ITA NO.121/CIT(A)-12/2017-18 DATED 27.09.2018 FOR THE A Y 2015-16. 2. SHRI SRIDHAR DORA, JCIT, REPRESENTED ON BEHALF O F THE REVENUE AND SHRI S.VENUGOPALAN, CA, REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF TH E ASSESSEE. ITA NO.3112 /CHNY/2018 :- 2 -: 3. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD.AR THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL. HE HAD SOLD A PLOT OF LAND ON 25.03.2015. THE ASSESSE E HAD ENTERED INTO A CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT FOR PURCHASE OF A FLAT IN TH E MONTH OF MARCH, 2014 AND THE PURCHASE DEED TOWARDS PURCHASE OF THE UNDIV IDED SHARE IN THE LAND OF 552 SQ. FT. WAS DONE ON 30.06.2014 AND THE FLAT WAS COMPLETED ON 01.09.2016, BY WHICH DATE, AN AMOUNT OF RS.1,09,45, 057/- WAS PAID TO THE PROMOTER. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT THE ASSESSE E HAD SOLD THE PLOT FOR RS.1.10 CRS. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT THE INVESTMEN T OF RS.1,09,45,057/- WAS MADE BY TAKING A LOAN FROM SHRI ANURAG MARDIA F OR A SUM OF RS.8.00 LAKHS AND AN AMOUNT OF RS.1,00,50,000/- FROM SMT. G . ALAGU NIRUPA, SISTER OF THE ASSESSEE. THE AO REJECTED THE ASSESS EES CLAIM FOR DEDUCTION U/S.54F ON THE GROUND THAT THE ENTIRE SALE PROCEEDS OF THE PLOT WAS MAINTAINED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT USED THE MONEY FOR RE-PAYING THE LOANS TAKEN FROM S HRI ANURGA MARDIA AND SMT. ALAGU NIRUPA. THUS, THE AO WAS OF THE OPI NION THAT THE SALE PROCEEDS OF THE PLOT WAS NOT INVESTED IN THE CONSTR UCTION OF THE HOUSE AND THE HOUSE WAS CONSTRUCTED MAINLY FROM THE LOANS TAK EN FROM THE OTHERS. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT THE LD.CIT(A) HAD ALSO DIS MISSED THE ASSESSEES APPEAL BY UPHOLDING THE VIEW OF THE AO. IT WAS A S UBMISSION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAVING COMPLIED WITH THE CONDITIONS PRESCR IBED U/S.54F, THE ASSESSEE WAS ENTITLED TO THE BENEFIT OF DEDUCTION U /S.54F. 4. IN REPLY, THE LD.DR VEHEMENTLY SUPPORTED THE ORD ER OF THE AO AND THE LD.CIT(A) ITA NO.3112 /CHNY/2018 :- 3 -: 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. 6. ADMITTEDLY, A PERUSAL OF THE FACTS AS RECORDED B Y THE AO AND AS EXTRACTED BY THE LD.CIT(A) CLEARLY SHOWS THAT THE R EQUIREMENT FOR CLAIMING DEDUCTION U/S.54F HAVE BEEN COMPLETELY MET BY THE A SSESSEE. THERE IS NO PROVISION U/S.54F WHICH REQUIRED AN ASSESSEE TO INV EST THE SALE PROCEEDS IN THE NEW RESIDENTIAL HOUSE FOR THE PURPOSE OF CLA IMING DEDUCTION U/S.54F. ALL THAT SEC.54F REQUIRES IS THAT THE ASSE SSEE MUST HAVE INVESTED THE CAPITAL GAINS IN THE NEW RESIDENTIAL HOUSE WITH IN THE PRESCRIBED TIME LIMIT. IN THE PRESENT CASE ALSO, CLEARLY THE ASSES SEE HAS MADE THE INVESTMENT AS REQUIRED U/S.54F, THE REASON GIVEN BY THE AO AND THE LD.CIT(A) THAT THE FUNDS ACQUIRED FROM THE SALE OF THE PLOT HAVE NOT BEEN USED FOR THE ACQUISITION OF THE NEW RESIDENTIAL HOU SE, IS NOT SUPPORTED BY THE PROVISIONS OF SEC.54F. CONSEQUENTLY, ON SUCH G ROUNDS, THE DEDUCTION U/S.54F CANNOT BE DENIED. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCE S, THE AO IS DIRECTED TO GRANT THE BENEFIT OF DEDUCTION U/S.54F AS CLAIME D BY THE ASSESSEE. THIS VIEW OF OURS IS SUPPORTED BY THE DECISION OF THE HO NBLE KERALA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF K.C.GOPALAN REPORTED IN 162 CTR 566 AS ALSO THE DECISION OF THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF MRS.PREMA P. SHAH REPORTED IN 282 ITR 211 (MUMBAI). ITA NO.3112 /CHNY/2018 :- 4 -: 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE 13 TH DAY OF MARCH, 2019, IN CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( ) ( S. JAYARAMAN ) ! /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( ) (GEORGE MATHAN) ! /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 3 /DATED: 13 TH MARCH, 2019. TLN , *45 65 /COPY TO: 1. ) /APPELLANT 4. 7 /CIT 2. *+) /RESPONDENT 5. 5 * /DR 3. 7 ( ) /CIT(A) 6. /GF