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

Aggrieved by the action of the Ld. CIT(A), assessee preferred this appeal stating that the Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate the fact that the issue on the basis of which the addition to the tune of Rs. 30,10,474/- was sustained was never raised by the learned Assessing Officer during the course of assessment proceedings and was not the subject matter of the appeal before him and therefore, such an action cannot be sustained. It is further contended that when two views of two different high courts are available before the Ld. CIT(A), namely, one view expressed in thecaseof Ramachandra Rao (supra) of Karnataka High Court and the other review expressed by the Bombay High Court in thecaseof Humayun Sulaiman (supra), without assigning any reasons Ld. CIT(A) rejected the view taken in thecaseof Ramachandra row (supra), instead of considering the view favourable to the assessee.

Shanti Prime Publication Pvt. Ltd.

Sec. 54F of Income Tax Act, 1961—Capital Gain— The payment made by the assessee towards purchase of residential house up to the due date of filing of the return of income prescribed under section 139(4) i.e. 31/03/2014 is allowable for considering deduction under section 54F - In case the assessee paid the amount equivalent to or more than the capital gains derived in the sale transaction of the house, the assessee is entitled to claim the relief under section 54F - RAJENDRA JOSHI V/s ITO - [2020] 28 ITCD Online 045 (ITAT-DELHI)