, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , , ' BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / .I.T.A. NO. 365/CHNY/2018 /ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-14 SHRI RANGABASHYAM THIRUMALAI, 167, THAMBU CHETTY STREET, CHENNAI 600 001. [PAN: AACPT 6860D] VS. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NON-CORPORATE CIRCLE -12(1), CHENNAI 600 006. ( /APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI. D. ANAND, ADVOCATE REVENUE BY : SHRI G.D. JAYANTHI ANGAYARKANNI, JCIT $ /DATE OF HEARING : 29.08.2018 $ /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 04.10.2018 / 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)-13, CHENNAI IN ITA NO. 28/CIT( A)-13/13-14 DATED 29.09.2017 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14. :- 2 -: ITA NO. 365/CHNY/2018 2. SHRI. RANGABASHYAM THIRUMALAI, THE ASSESSEE, SOL D A PLOT IN HOSUR FOR RS. 92,89,200/-, OUT OF WHICH HE PAID RS. 82 LAKHS TO THE BUILDER, M/S. OZONE PROJECTS PVT. LTD., FOR PURCHASING A FLAT AT KOYAMB EDU FOR A TENTATIVE CONSIDERATION OF RS. 1,26,51,971/- AND INVESTED RS. 11 LAKHS IN CGAS, 1988 SCHEME BEFORE FILING HIS RETURN. HE CLAIMED DEDUCT ION U/S. 54F FOR RS. 88,25,742/-. THE AO REFUSED TO ALLOW THIS CLAIM FO R THE REASON THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS ENTERED INTO AN AGREEMENT FOR PURCHASE OF FLAT WHICH IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION, HAS NOT PRODUCED ANY OCCUPANCY CERTIF ICATE REGARDING THE NEW ASSET AND HENCE, THE ASSESSEE IS NOT ENTITLED FOR T HE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S. 54F AT RS. 88,25,742/-. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE FI LED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). ALTHOUGH, THE ASSESSEE HAS PRODUCED A COPY OF AGREEMENT FOR THE PURCHASE OF FLAT ENTERED INTO WITH M/S. OZONE PROJE CTS PVT. LTD., COPIES OF BANK ACCOUNTS, WHEREIN, THE AMOUNT OF PAYMENT TO THE BUI LDER IS REFLECTED AND RELIED ON VARIOUS HIGH COURT DECISIONS, THE LD. CIT (A), INTER ALIA, HAS HELD THAT SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PURCHASED A RESIDENTIAL HOUSE OR COMPLETED THE CONSTRUCTION OF HABITABLE HOUSE BEFORE THE DUE DATE OF FURNISHING THE RETURN, THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO ESTABLISH HIS CASE AND HENCE HE DISMISSED THE APPEAL. 3. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE FILED THIS APPEAL RELYIN G ON THE MUMBAI ITAT DECISION IN ITA NO. 7512/MUM/2013 DATED 19.08.2015 AND THIS TRIBUNAL DECISION IN ITA NO. 3520/MAD/1989 DATED 25.04.1996. THE ASSESSEE PLEADED THAT WHEN THE SALE PROCEEDS OF THE CAPITAL ASSET ST OOD INVESTED IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF A RESIDENTIAL HOUSE WITHIN THE STIP ULATED PERIOD, THE ASSESSEE :- 3 -: ITA NO. 365/CHNY/2018 SHOULD BE ENTITLED TO RELIEF U/S. 54F AND COMPLETIO N OF CONSTRUCTION OR OCCUPATION IS NOT ESSENTIAL IN VIEW OF CBDT CIRCULA R NOS. 471, DATED 15.10.1986 AND 672, DATED 16.12.1993. PER CONTRA, THE DR SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. 4. WE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. FROM THE ABOVE FACTS, IT IS CLEAR THAT THERE IS NO DISPUTE ON THE FACT THAT OUT OF THE SAL E CONSIDERATION, THE ASSESSEE HAS PAID RS. 88,25,742/- TO M/S. OZONE PROJECTS PVT . LTD., TOWARDS PURCHASE OF A FLAT AT KOYAMBEDU, WHICH IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION. THUS, THE ASSESSEE HAS COMPLIED WITH THE REQUIREMENT OF SECTION 54F OF THE ACT. IN THE LIGHT OF THE PRECEDENTS, RELIED ON BY THE ASSESSEE, SUPRA, WE F IND NO REASON TO DENY THE CLAIM U/S. 54F. WE DIRECT ACCORDINGLY. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THURSDAY, THE 04 TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2018 AT CHENNAI. SD/- ( . . . ) (N.R.S. GANESAN) /JUDICIAL MEMBER SD/- ( ) (S. JAYARAMAN) /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /CHENNAI, ) /DATED: 04 TH OCTOBER , 2018 JPV $*+,-, /COPY TO: 1. / /APPELLANT 2. *0/ /RESPONDENT 3. 1 ) ( /CIT(A) 4. 1 /CIT 5. ,* /DR 6. 4 /GF