Inder Sen Setia, New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 6598/DEL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2943 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-06-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 07-06-2017
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 26-12-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 54F

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : SMC : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT ITA NO. 6598/DEL/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13 INDER SEN SETIA, D-13, M.K. RESIDENCY, PLOT NO.8-B, SECTOR-11, DWARKA, NEW DELHI. PAN: AHMPS1140C VS. ITO, WARD 64(3), NEW DELHI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI RAKESH NANDA, CA DEPTT. BY : SHRI AMRIT LAL, SR.DR DATE OF HEARING : 07.06.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 08.06.2017 ORDER THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) ON 19.09.2016 IN RELATION TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13. 2. THE ONLY ISSUE RAISED IN THIS APPEAL IS AGAINST THE DENIAL OF EXEMPTION U/S 54F TO SOME EXTENT. ITA NO.6598/DEL/2016 2 3. BRIEFLY STATED, THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT T HE ASSESSEE SOLD PLOT NO.473, BLOCK-C, SUSHANT LOK PHASE-I, GURGAON FOR A SUM OF RS.82,50,000/- AND CLAIMED EXEMPTION FROM CAPITAL G AIN U/S 54F OF THE ACT FOR A SUM OF RS.82,40,536/- IN THE PURCHASE OF FLOO R (VATIKA INDIA NEXT). THE ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED FROM THE PERUSAL OF BANK ACCOUNT THAT THE SALE DEED OF THE ORIGINAL ASSET WAS DATED 03.08.201 1 AND THE RETURN U/S 139(1) WAS FILED ON 30.07.2012. ONLY A SUM OF RS.5 1,00,174/- WAS FOUND TO HAVE BEEN APPROPRIATED BEFORE THE FILING OF THE RETURN AND THE REMAINING AMOUNT OF RS.31,40,362/- WAS APPROPRIATED AFTER THE FILING OF THE RETURN. THE CLAIM FOR EXEMPTION U/S 54F WAS PROPORTIONATELY REDUCED TO RS.48,01,910/-. THE ASSESSEE REMAINED UNSUCCESSFUL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). 4. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED T HE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE UNDISPUTED FACT IS THAT A SUM OF RS .51,00,174/- WAS PAID BY THE ASSESSEE FOR PURCHASE OF A NEW PROPERTY BEFORE THE DUE DATE OF RETURN U/S 139(1) OF THE ACT, FOR WHICH THE ASSESSING OFFICER ALLOWED EXEMPTION U/S 54F. THE DENIAL IS ONLY FOR A SUM OF RS.31,40,362/ -, WHICH WAS PAID BY THE ASSESSEE IN NOVEMBER, 2013, THAT IS, AFTER THE DUE DATE OF RETURN U/S 139(1) OF THE ACT. HERE, IT IS RELEVANT TO NOTE THAT THE DUE DATE U/S 139(4) FOR THE ASSESSEE IS 30.03.2014. AS THE REMAINING AMOUNT OF RS.31.40 LAC WAS ITA NO.6598/DEL/2016 3 UTILIZED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE DUE DATE OF RET URN U/S 139(4), THERE CANNOT BE ANY DENIAL OF BENEFIT U/S 54F OF THE ACT. THE HON'BLE GUWAHATI HIGH COURT IN CIT VS. RAJESH KUMAR JALAN (2006) 286 ITR 274 (GUWA HATI ) HAS HELD SO IN THE CONTEXT OF SECTION 54, WHOSE LAN GUAGE IS SAME. SIMILAR VIEW HAS BEEN TAKEN BY THE HON'BLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT IN CIT VS. JAGRUTI AGGARWAL (2011) 339 ITR 610 (P&H). THE HON'BLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT IN CIT AND ANR VS. SMT. VRINDA P. ISSAC (2011) 64 DTR 376 (KAR) HAS HELD THAT IF THE AMOUNT IS PAID BEFORE THE TIME ALLOWED U/S 139(4), THERE CAN BE NO DENIAL OF EXEMPTION U/S 54F OF THE ACT. IT IS RELEVANT TO NOTE THAT THE JUDGMENT IN THE CASE OF VRINDA P. ISSAC (SUPRA) HAS BEEN RENDERED IN THE CONTEXT OF SECTION 54F ITSELF, WHI CH IS DISPUTED IN THE INSTANT APPEAL. THE RELIANCE OF THE LD. DR ON THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN HUMAYUN SULEMAN MERCHANT VS. CHIEF CIT (2016) 378 ITR 421 (BOM) IS MISCONCEIVED INASMUCH AS THE HON'BLE BOMBAY HIG H COURT IN THE LAST PARA OF ITS JUDGMENT HAS ALSO HEL D THAT THE DECISION IN THE CASE OF GUWAHATI HIGH IN RAJESH KUMAR JALAN( SUPRA) WAS NOT APPLICABLE TO THE FACTS OF THAT CASE. SUCH A DECISION OF THE HON'BLE GUWAHATI HIGH COURT GOVERNS THE POSITION AS IS OBTAINING IN THE I NSTANT CASE. RESPECTFULLY ITA NO.6598/DEL/2016 4 FOLLOWING THE AFORESTATED PRECEDENTS, I RESTORE THE CLAIM OF EXEMPTION U/S 54F TO THE EXTENT MADE BY THE ASSESSEE. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASS ESSEE IS ALLOWED. THE DECISION WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 0 8 TH JUNE, 2017. SD/- (R.S. SYAL) VICE PRESIDENT DATED: 08 TH JUNE, 2017. DK COPY FORWARDED TO 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR DY. REGISTRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI