Section 54F: Where the genuineness of the transactions is established, to avail exemption u/s 54F it is not mandatory that the agreement must be registered or possession must be obtained

6. [2020] 77 ITR (Trib.) 394 (Pune)(Trib.) Lalitkumar Kesarimal Jain vs. DCIT ITA No. 1345-1347/Pune/2017 A.Y.: 2012-13 Date of order: 24^th September,
2019

Section 54F: Where the genuineness of the
transactions is established, to avail exemption u/s 54F it is not mandatory
that the agreement must be registered or possession must be obtained

FACTS

The assessee earned
long-term capital gains on sale of certain assets and in his return of income
claimed exemption u/s 54F to the tune of Rs. 18.96 crores for purchase of new
residential property. The A.O. rejected the said claim citing the following
reasons: (1) The agreements for purchase were unregistered; (2) The seller had
not given possession of the property; and (3) The assessee was an interested party
in the seller’s concern. The assessee substantiated that he had already paid
Rs. 22.10 crores to the seller before the due date of filing return of income
for the relevant assessment year and the same was not returned. In an
affidavit, the assessee explained the reason for not getting possession from
the seller. However, the CIT(A) upheld the order of the A.O., rejecting the
exemption u/s 54F.

The assessee
therefore filed an appeal before the ITAT.

HELD

(i)  Section 54F is incorporated to promote housing
projects and development activities and according to it once a person sells
some assets and earns capital gains, that money should be utilised for
procuring some new assets. The assessee should part with that money or a
substantial amount of it, for procuring a new residential house. What
essentially is looked into in this regard is the bona fide nature of the
assessee and the genuineness of the transaction/s.

(ii)  It was an undisputed fact that the assessee
had paid a sum of Rs. 22.10 crores to the seller and the Department had not
brought on record any evidence to prove that the said money came back to the
assessee.

(iii) The entire ambit of the Income-tax Act is based
within the larger framework of welfare legislation. The object of each
provision is ultimately the development of the society as well as the
individual and at the same time taking care of the interests of taxpayers.

(iv) Merely because the assessee had an interest in
the seller concern by itself cannot be reason to deny the benefit of deduction
when the genuineness of the transactions was established and there were several
other persons who were purchasing flats from the same seller and who had
already paid advance amounts.

(v) It was further found that the delay in
completion of the project was absolutely circumstantial and neither the
assessee nor the seller had any mala fide intention for delay of the
project.

(vi) Referring to the decision of the Supreme Court
in the case of Fibre Boards (P) Ltd. vs. CIT [2015] 376 ITR 596 (SC)
and several other decisions of Tribunals, it was held that it is not mandatory
that the agreement must be registered or possession must be obtained. If it is
substantiated that the transaction is genuine, then benefit of deduction u/s
54F should be given to the assessee.

Accordingly, the
assessee was granted the benefit of deduction u/s 54F.