Latest Income-Tax Details

For Full Access To All Latest Judgments on Income Tax
Click Here To Subscribe Now
Take a tour of our Income-Tax Library

Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the tribunal was right and justified in granting exemption u/s 54F when the unutilised portion of the sale proceeds were not deposited in the capital gains account scheme before the due date for filing of return u/s 139(1)?

Shanti Prime Publication Pvt. Ltd.

Sec. 54F of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Capital gain – Tribunal dismissed the revenue’s appeal observing that “The assessee has not invested in Capital Gain Account Scheme before 139(1) of the Act but complied with the conditions u/s.54F(1) of the Act by purchasing and construction of residential property within three years from the date of transfer of original asset which is not disputed in the assessment proceedings or in appellate proceedings. The provisions of Sec. 54F are beneficial provisions and are to be considered liberally in the aspect of limitation period. But the investment in residential property is must which the assessee has proved with evidence and complied before the lower authorities. The CIT(A) relied on the legal provision and submissions of the assessee exhaustively with judicial decisions. Considering the factual aspects, genuineness of the transactions and beneficial aspects of the provisions, we are of the opinion that the CIT(A) has rightly construed the findings and the explanation of the assessee with observation in his order and allowed the deduction u/s.54F of the Act”. High Court also dismissed the appeal of the revenue that the finding of the facts arrived at by the learned Tribunal are perfectly in order and justified and correct. - CIT V/s UMAYAL ANNAMALAI (SMT.) - [2020] 273 TAXMAN 146 (MAD)