Facts
a)
Assessee earned capital gain on sale of a residential house property.
Thereafter, he paid certain amount to one 'M' for purchase of another residential
house property and, accordingly, claimed exemption under section 54.
b)
In terms of agreement, 'M' had to transfer house property to assessee
after getting it constructed. However, in view of failure of 'M' to complete
construction of property, purchase agreement was cancelled and amount was
refunded to assessee.
c)
Assessing Officer (AO) taking a view that assessee neither purchased nor
constructed a new house property within the time-limit stipulated in section 54,
rejected his claim for exemption.
d)
The CIT(A) confirmed the order of AO. Aggrieved assessee filed the
instant appeal before the tribunal.
The
tribunal held in favour of assessee as under-
1)
The High Court in the case of CIT
v. Smt. B. S. Shanthakumari [2015] 60 taxmann.com 74 (Kar.) held that
completion of construction within prescribed time-limit is not mandatory and
what is necessary is that the construction should have been commenced.
2)
It was not disputed that construction of property for which agreement
was entered into with 'M' had already begun. The question whether the above
agreement finally fructified was a different matter altogether.
3)
Assessee had for all practical purposes satisfied the conditions under
section 54 and earnestly demonstrated his intention to invest the capital gain
in a residential house.
4)
Therefore, even though said transaction did not eventually materialize
and 'M' had to refund the amount to assessee, still exemption under section 54
was to be allowed- [2016] 68 taxmann.com 43 (Bangalore - Trib.)
No comments:
Post a Comment