ACIT, Kota V. SMT. ZAHIDA BANO, Kota

ITA 579/JPR/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2112 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 11 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-05-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 11-07-2017
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 30-05-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Capital asset
• Section: 143(3); 54F; 148; 54

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHE S, JAIPUR JH FOT; IKY JKO] U;KF;D LNL; ,OA JH FOE FLAG ;KNO] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM VK;DJ VIHY LA- @ ITA NO. 579/JP/2013 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z @ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06 THE ACIT, CIRCLE- 1, KOTA. CUKE VS. SMT. ZAHIDA BANO, 5-B-18, VIGYAN NAGAR, KOTA. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO.: ABSPB6777A VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ L S@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI MAHENDRA GARGIEYA (ADV.) JKTLO DH VKSJ LS @ REVENUE BY : SHRI AJAY MALIK (ADDL.CIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF HEARING : 25/01/2018 MN?KKS'K.KK DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 31/01/2018 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER: VIJAY PAL RAO, J.M. THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) DATED 26.03.2016 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 5-06. THE REVENUE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN :- (I) DELETING THE CAPITAL GAIN OF RS. 44,84,675/- AS SESSMENT IN THE A.Y. 2005-06; ITA NO. 579/JP/2013 ACIT VS. SMT. ZAHIDA BANO, KOTA 2 (VI) THE APPELLANT CRAVES LIBERTY TO RAISE ADDITION AL GROUND AND TO MODIFY/AMEND THE GROUND OF APPEAL AT THE TIME OF HE ARING. 2. THE ASSESSEE FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME ON 01.10 .2011 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME RS. 8,13,460/- WHICH WAS PROCESSED U/S 143(1) OF THE ACT ON 28.02.2006. SUBSEQUENTLY THE AO REOPENED THE ASS ESSMENT BY ISSUING THE NOTICE U/S 148 OF THE ACT ON 05.06.2009 TO ASSESS THE CAPITAL GAIN ON A TRANSFER OF PLOT OF LAND FOR THE ASSESSME NT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION INSTEAD OF THE CAPITAL GAIN SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 AND CLAIM THE DEDUCTION U/S 54F OF THE ACT. THE AO COMPLETED THE REASSESSMENT AND ASSESSED THE CAPITAL GAIN FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION WITHOUT GIVING THE BEN EFIT OF SECTION 54F OF THE ACT. ON APPEAL, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DECIDED T HIS ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY HOLDING THAT THE CAPITAL GAIN AROSE ON ACCOUNT OF TRANSFER OF THE PLOT OF LAND IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 AND NOT IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06. 3. BEFORE US, LD. AR DR HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DECIDED THIS ISSUE ON THE GROUND THAT THE CAPITAL G AIN WAS ASSESSED FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 AS HELD BY THE LD. CIT( A) WHILE DECIDING THE APPEAL FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. HOWEVER , WHEN THE CONDITION OF TRANSFER AS PROVIDED U/S 2(47)(V) R.W. S. 53A OF THE TRANSFER ITA NO. 579/JP/2013 ACIT VS. SMT. ZAHIDA BANO, KOTA 3 OF PROPERTY ACT ARE SATISFIED THEN THE TRANSFER OF LAND IN QUESTION WAS COMPLETED ON THE DATE WHEN THE ASSESSEE HAS ENTERED INTO AN AGREEMENT AND ALLOWED THE DEVELOPER TO CONSTRUCT TH E FLAT ON THE PLOT OF LAND. HE HAS SUBMITTED THAT AS PER THE AGREEMENT DATED 13.09.2004 THE ASSESSEE ALLOWED THE DEVELOPER COMPANY TO CONST RUCT THE FLAT AND MAY RECEIVE THE ADVANCE FOR SALE OF FLATS SO CONSTR UCTED. THEREFORE, WHEN THE ASSESSEE HAS TRANSFERRED THE POSSESSION AN D RECEIVED MORE THAN 50% OF THE CONSIDERATION DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION THEN, AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 2(47) (V) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT THE TRANSFER IS COMPLETED AND LONG TERM CAPITAL GAI N ARISING THE SAID TRANSFER IS LIABLE TO BE ASSESSED IN THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. THE LD. DR HAS POINTED OUT THAT THE ASSESSEE RECEIVED RS. 4 0,11,000/- OUT OF TOTAL CONSIDERATION OF RS. 75,11,000/- DURING THE Y EAR UNDER CONSIDERATION AND THEREFORE, THE TRANSACTION OF TRA NSFER WILL BE DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN COMPLETED IN THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERAT ION. HE HAS RELIED UPON THE ORDERS OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 4. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. AR HAS SUBMITTED THAT AS PER THE AGREEMENT DATED 13.09.2004 THE ASSESSEE HAS ONLY GR ANTED LICENCE TO THE DEVELOPER TO CARRYING OUT OF THE CONSTRUCTION O F FLATS AND ONLY AFTER RECEIPT OF THE ENTIRE SALE CONSIDERATION THE ASSESS EE HAS HANDED OVER ITA NO. 579/JP/2013 ACIT VS. SMT. ZAHIDA BANO, KOTA 4 THE POSSESSION OF THE PLOT OF LAND IN QUESTION. HE HAS REFERRED TO THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE AGREEMENT AND SUBMITTED THAT IT IS SPECIFICALLY MENTIONED IN THE AGREEMENT THAT ONLY A FTER THE ENTIRE SALE CONSIDERATION IS RECEIVED THE POSSESSION OF THE LAN D WILL BE HANDED OVER TO THE DEVELOPER. HE HAS FURTHER POINTED OUT THAT F OR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED U/S 143(3 ) WHERE IN THE AO HELD THAT THE CAPITAL GAIN WAS TO BE CONSIDERED IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 ONLY. HOWEVER, THE LD. CIT(A) DECIDED THIS ISSUE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE A ND ALLOWED THE DEDUCTION U/S 54F WHICH WAS NOT CHALLENGED BY THE D EPARTMENT. THUS, ONCE THE DEPARTMENT HAS ACCEPTED THE ORDER OF THE L D. CIT(A) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 THEN THE CONTRARY STAND CAN NOT BE TAKEN BY THE DEPARTMENT. HE HAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT EVEN IN THE CASE OF THE HUSBAND OF THE ASSESSEE THIS ISSUE WAS DECIDED IN F AVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY HOLDING THAT THE CAPITAL GAIN HAS TO BE CONSIDERED FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 AND NOT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 AND REVENUE HAS NOT CHALLENGED THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT (A) DATED 29.12.2008 IN THE CASE OF NAMELY MR. MOHD. MIAN. EV EN THE DECISION OF THE LD. CIT(A) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 IN C ASE MOHD. MIAN HAS ITA NO. 579/JP/2013 ACIT VS. SMT. ZAHIDA BANO, KOTA 5 NOT BEEN CHALLENGED BY THE REVENUE. HE HAS SUPPORTE D THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AS WELL AS RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. AT THE OUTSET WE NOTE THAT THE ASSESSEE DECLARED LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN FROM SALE OF THE LAND IN QUE STION FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 AND ALSO CLAIMED DEDUCTION U/S 54F OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHILE PASSING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT HELD THAT THE CAPITAL G AINS WERE ASSESSABLE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 AND NOT FOR THE ASS ESSMENT YEAR 2006- 07. ON APPEAL, THE LD. CIT(A) DECIDED THIS ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE VIDE ORDER DATED 30.06.2010 AND ALSO ALLOW ED THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S 54F OF THE ACT FOR THE SAID ASSESSMEN T YEAR 2006-07. IT IS NOT IN DISPUTED THAT THE REVENUE HAS NOT CHALLENGED THE SAID ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. THE LD. CIT(A) AFTER CONSIDERING ALL THESE FACTS HAS GIVEN THE CONCLUDIN G FINDING IN PARA 6.3 AS UNDER:- I HAVE CONSIDERED THE THE CONTENTIONS OF THE APPE LLANT AS WELL AS ASSESSMENT ORDER. IT IS SEEN THAT IT HAS BEEN PO INTED OUT BY THE APPELLANT THAT ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN THE CAPITAL G AINS IN SALE OF THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION IN A.Y. 2006-07. THE AO HE LD THAT CAPITAL GAINS WERE ASSESSABLE IN A.Y. 2005-06 AND NOT IN A. Y. 2006-07. THE MATTER WENT TO THE CIT(A) WHO DECIDED VIDE APPE AL NO' ITA NO. 579/JP/2013 ACIT VS. SMT. ZAHIDA BANO, KOTA 6 509/2008-09 BY ORDER DATED 30.06.2010 THAT LONG TER M CAPITAL GAINS ARISING FROM SALE OF THE PROPERTY WOULD BE T AXED IN A.Y. 2006-07 AND NOT IN A.Y. 2005-06. THE OPERATIVE PART OF THE DECISION IS AS UNDER: ' IN GIVEN FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, I HOLD THAT 665 , PRATAP NAGAR, DADABARI WAS A RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY AND THAT THE CO RRECT DATE FOR ITS TRANSFER WAS 19.03.2006, WHEN THROUGH A SAMARPA N NAMA THE APPELLANT TRANSFERRED UNCONDITIONAL POSSESSION AND FULL RIGHTS AFTER RECEIVING ENTIRE PAYMENT FROM THE PURCHASER. CONSEQ UENTLY, LONG TERM CAPITAL GAINS ARISING FROM SUCH SALE WOULD BE TAXED IN AY 2006-07, AND NOT AY 05-06 AS PROPOSED BY THE ASSESS ING OFFICER. AS THE APPELLANT HAD INVESTED THE PROCEEDS FROM SAL E OF 665, PRATAP NAGAR, DADABARI IN 113, SHAKTI NAGAR, KOTA P URCHASED FROM RAJENDRA KUMAR MITTAL AND NAWAL KISHORE MITTAL AS STIPULATED IN SECTION 54 OF THE ACT, 1961 WERE SATI SFIED, THE APPELLANT WAS ENTITLED FOR BENEFIT OF SECTION 54 OF THE IT ACT, 1961. GROUNDS NO. 2 AND 3 OF THE APPEAL ARE ACCEPTE D. FROM ABOVE, IT IS APPARENT THAT THE ORDER OF THE AO HAS MERGED WITH THAT OF LD.CIT(A). IT HAS BEEN ALSO POINTED OU T BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THIS MATTER HAS ATTAINED FINALITY AS NO APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED AGAINST THE SAID ORDER THOUGH ON TAX EFF ECT. HOWEVER, IT IS A FACT THAT AS FAR AS ASSESEE IS CONCERNED TH IS MATTER HAS ATTAINED FINALITY IN A.Y. 2006-07. IN VIEW OF ABOVE DISCUSSION, THE SAME INCOME CANNOT BE BROUGHT TO TAX AGAIN IN A.Y. 2005-06 AS IT HAS ALREADY BEEN HELD TO BE ASSESSABLE IN A.Y. 2006-07 AS DISCUSSED ABOVE. FURTHER, IT HAS BEEN POINTED OUT BY THE APPELLANT T HAT IN THE SIMILAR CIRCUMSTANCES IN CASE OF HUSBAND OF APPELLA NT MR. MOHD. MIAN, CAPITAL GAINS WERE ASSESSED IN A.Y. 2005-06 B Y THE AO AFTER REOPENING THE CASE WHILE THE HONBLE CIT(A) IN ORDE R DATED 29.12.2011 HAS HELD THAT LONG TERM CAPITAL GAINS FR OM THE SALE OF THE PROPERTY WOULD BE TAXABLE IN A.Y. 2006-07. ITA NO. 579/JP/2013 ACIT VS. SMT. ZAHIDA BANO, KOTA 7 IN VIEW OF ABOVE DISCUSSION, BOTH THE ABOVE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE ALLOWED. THUS, IT IS CLEAR THAT THE LD. CIT(A) FOR THE ASSES SMENT YEAR 2006-07 HAS DECIDED THIS ISSUE BY HOLDING THAT THE CAPITAL GAIN WAS TO BE CONSIDERED FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 AND NOT FOR THE AS SESSMENT YEAR 2005-06. SIMILARLY IN THE CASE OF MOHD. MIAN THE HU SBAND OF THE ASSESSEE THE LD. CIT(A) HELD THAT THE LONG TERM CAP ITAL GAIN FROM THE SALE OF THE PROPERTY WOULD BE TAXABLE IN THE ASSESS MENT YEAR 2006-07. NEITHER IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE NOR IN THE CASE OF THE HUSBAND OF THE ASSESSEE THE REVENUE CHALLENGED THE ORDER OF LD . CIT(A) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. THEREFORE, THE APPEAL OF T HE REVENUE IS NOT MAINTAINABLE ON THIS GROUND ALONE. 6. WE FURTHER NOTE THAT WHEN THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIM ED DEDUCTION U/S 54F OF THE INCOME TAX ACT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YE AR 2006-07 WHICH WAS ALLOWED BY THE LD. CIT(A) THEN THE SAID CLAIM I S ALSO ALLOWABLE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION PARTICULARL Y IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT THE INVESTMENT IN THE NEW HOUSE HAS BEEN MADE BY THE ASSESSEE WITHIN TIME PRESCRIBED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECT ION 54F OF THE ACT. IT WAS BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE THAT THE ASSESSEE PURCHAS ED THE NEW PROPERTY ON 26.12.2005 AND THEREFORE THE INVESTMENT IN NEW PROPERTY ITA NO. 579/JP/2013 ACIT VS. SMT. ZAHIDA BANO, KOTA 8 WAS MADE WITHIN PRESCRIBED TIME UNDER THE PROVISION S OF SECTION 54F OF THE ACT. THOUGH THE REVENUE CAN RAISED AN OBJECTION ABOUT THE ALLOWABILITY OF DEDUCTING U/S 54F OF THE ACT AS TH E ASSESSEE HAS NOT DEPOSITED THE NET CONSIDERATION IN THE CAPITAL GAIN ACCOUNT HOWEVER, WHEN THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT RECEIVED THE ENTIRE SALE CONSIDERATION DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION THEN THE QUESTION OF D EPOSITING THE SAME DOES NO ARISE. THE CONDITION OF DEPOSITING THE AMOU NT IN CAPITAL GAIN ACCOUNTS SCHEME PRESUPPOSES THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS A LREADY RECEIVED THE ENTIRE SALE CONSIDERATION. IN THE CASE IN HAND WHEN THE ASSESSEE DID NOT RECEIVE THE SALE CONSIDERATION DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION THEN, THE SAID CONDITION CANNOT BE THRUST UPON THE ASSESSEE. FURTHER, THE ASSESSEE HAS INVESTED THE AMOUNT WITHIN THE TIM E PERIOD PROVIDED U/S 54F OF THE ACT AND WE FIND THAT THE HONBLE KAR NATAKA HIGH COURT IN CASE OF PRINCIPAL CIT VS. C. GOPALASWAMY 384 ITR 30 7 HAS HELD THAT THE CONDITION PRECEDENT FOR CLAIMING THE BENEFIT U/S 54 /54F OF THE ACT IS THAT CAPITAL GAIN REALIZED FROM CAPITAL ASSET SHOUL D HAVE BEEN INVESTED EITHER IN PURCHASE OF RESIDENTIAL HOUSE OR IN CONST RUCTING THE RESIDENTIAL HOUSE. IF IT IS ESTABLISHED THAT THE CONSIDERATION WAS RECEIVED ON ALIENATION PROPERTY HAS BEEN INVESTED FOR PURCHASE OF RESIDENTIAL HOUSE, THE ASSESSEE WOULD BE ENTITLED TO BENEFIT OF SECTIO N 54F OF THE ACT ITA NO. 579/JP/2013 ACIT VS. SMT. ZAHIDA BANO, KOTA 9 IRRESPECTIVE OF THE FACT THAT THE TRANSFER WAS NOT COMPLETED IN ALL RESPECT. IN CASE OF CIT VS. SAMBANDAM UDAYKUMAR 345 ITR 389 THE HONBLE HIGH COURT HAS IN PARA 10 AND 11 AS UNDER:- 10. A READING OF THE AFORESAID PROVISION MAKES IT VERY CLEAR THAT IF A CAPITAL GAIN ARISES FROM THE TRANSFER OF ANY L ONG TERM CAPITAL ASSET, NOT BEING A RESIDENTIAL HOUSE AND THE ASSESS EE HAS WITHIN THE PERIOD OF ONE YEAR BEFORE OR TWO YEARS AFTER TH E DATE ON WHICH TRANSFER TOOK PLACE PURCHASED OR HAS WITHIN A PERIOD OF THREE YEARS AFTER THAT DATE CONSTRUCTED A RESIDENTI AL HOUSE, IF THE COST OF THE NEW ASSET IS NOT LESS THAN THE NET CONS IDERATION IN RESPECT OF THE ORIGINAL ASSET THE WHOLE SUCH CAPITA L GAIN SHALL NOT BE CHARGED UNDER SECTION 45 OF THE ACT. HOWEVER, IF THE COST OF THE NEW ASSET IS LESS THAN THE NET CONSIDERATION IN RESPECT OF THE ORIGINAL ASSET, SO MUCH OF THE CAPITAL GAIN AS BEAR S TO BE WHOLE OF THE CAPITAL GAIN THE SAME PROPORTION AS THE COST OF THE NEW ASSET BEARS TO THE NET CONSIDERATION SHALL NOT BE CHARGED UNDER SECTION 45 OF THE ACT. 11. SECTION 45 OF THE ACT MAKES IT VERY CLEAR THAT ANY PROFITS OR GAINS ARISING FROM THE TRANSFER OF A CAPITAL ASSET EFFECTED IN THE PREVIOUS YEAR SHALL, SAVE OR OTHERWISE PROVIDED IN SECTIONS 54, 54B, 54D, 54E, 54EA, 54EB, 54F, 54G AND 54H IS CHAR GEABLE TO INCOME TAX UNDER THE HEAD 'CAPITAL GAINS' AND SHALL BE DEEMED TO BE INCOME OF THE PREVIOUS YEAR IN WHICH THE TRANSFE R TOOK PLACE. THE AFORESAID SECTIONS WHICH FORM PART OF SECTION 5 4 OF THE ACT ARE CASES WHERE CAPITAL GAIN ON TRANSFER OF CAPITAL ASSET NOT TO BE CHARGED IN THOSE CASES. SECTION 54F OF THE ACT IS A BENEFICIAL PROVISION OF PROMOTING THE CONSTRUCTION OF RESIDENT IAL HOUSE. THEREFORE, THE SAID PROVISION HAS TO BE CONSTRUED L IBERALLY FOR ACHIEVING THE PURPOSE FOR WHICH IT WAS INCORPORATED IN THE STATUTE. THE INTENTION OF THE LEGISLATURE WAS TO EN COURAGE INVESTMENTS IN THE ACQUISITION OF A RESIDENTIAL HOU SE AND COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION OR OCCUPATION IS NOT THE REQUIREMENT ITA NO. 579/JP/2013 ACIT VS. SMT. ZAHIDA BANO, KOTA 10 OF LAW. THE WORDS USED IN THE SECTION ARE 'PURCHASE D' OR 'CONSTRUCTED'. FOR SUCH PURPOSE, THE CAPITAL GAIN R EALIZED SHOULD HAVE BEEN INVESTED IN A RESIDENTIAL HOUSE. THE COND ITION PRECEDENT FOR CLAIMING BENEFIT UNDER THE SAID PREVI SION IS THE CAPITAL GAIN REALIZED FROM SALE OF CAPITAL ASSET SH OULD HAVE BEEN PARTED BY THE ASSESSEE AND INVESTED EITHER IN PURCH ASING A RESIDENTIAL HOUSE OR IN CONSTRUCTING A RESIDENTIAL HOUSE. IF AFTER MAKING THE ENTIRE PAYMENT, MERELY BECAUSE A REGISTE RED SALE DEED HAD NOT BEEN EXECUTED AND REGISTERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE PERIOD STIPULATED, HE CANNOT BE DENIED THE BENEFIT OF SECTION 54F OF THE ACT. SIMILARLY, IF HE HAS INVESTED THE MONEY IN CONSTRUCTION OF A RESIDENTIAL HOUSE, MEREL Y BECAUSE THE CONSTRUCTION WAS NOT COMPLETE IN ALL RESPECTS AND I T WAS NOT IN A FIT CONDITION TO BE OCCUPIED WITHIN THE PERIOD STIP ULATED, THAT WOULD NOT DISENTITLE THE ASSESSEE FROM CLAIMING THE BENEFIT UNDER SECTION 54F OF THE ACT. THE ESSENCE OF THE SAID PRO VISION IS WHETHER THE ASSESSEE WHO RECEIVED CAPITAL GAINS HAS INVESTED IN A RESIDENTIAL HOUSE. ONCE IT IS DEMONSTRATED THAT T HE CONSIDERATION RECEIVED ON TRANSFER HAS BEEN INVESTE D EITHER IN PURCHASING A RESIDENTIAL HOUSE OR IN CONSTRUCTION O F A RESIDENTIAL HOUSE EVEN THOUGH THE TRANSACTIONS ARE NOT COMPLETE IN ALL RESPECTS AND AS REQUITED UNDER THE LAW, THAT WOULD NOT DISENTITLE THE ASSESSEE FROM THE SAID BENEFIT. THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES O F THE CASE WHEN THE INVESTMENT WAS MADE WITHIN THE TIME PERIOD EVEN COU NTED FROM THE DATE OF TRANSFER TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE DATE OF AG REEMENT DATED 13.09.2004 THEN THE ASSESSMENT OF CAPITAL GAIN TAX EITHER FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 OR FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 WOULD BE REVENUE NEUTRAL AS THE BENEFIT OF SECTION 54F IS AV AILABLE TO THE ITA NO. 579/JP/2013 ACIT VS. SMT. ZAHIDA BANO, KOTA 11 ASSESSEE. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE DISCUSSION, WE DO NO T FIND ANY REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) . IN THE RESULT, THE REVENUE APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 31/01/2018 SD/- SD/- FOE FLAG ;KNO FOT; IKY JKO (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) (VIJAY PAL RAO) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 31/01/2018. * SANTOSH. VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- ACIT, CIRCLE-1, KOTA. 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- SMT. ZAHIDA BANO, KOTA. 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR. 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE {ITA NO. 579/JP/2013} VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASST. REGISTRAR