INCOME TAX OFFICER Vs. SAROJA S. MEKAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an Appeal by the Revenue directed against the Order by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -32, Mumbai ('CIT(A)' for short) dated 10.10.2012, allowing the assessee's appeal contesting its assessment u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' hereinafter) for the assessment year (A.Y.) 2009 -10 vide order dated 19.12.2011.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case, as gathered from the record, are that the assessee, an individual, claimed exemption u/s.54F of the Act in respect of the long term capital gains (LTCG) arising to it on the sale of an industrial gala at Pragati Industrial Complex, Pune for Rs.40.50 lacs vide sale agreement dated 21.07.2008 (PB pgs.20 -26), in view of the purchase of a residential flat in a building known as 'Radha Krishna Niwas' at Vile Parle (E), Mumbai (from a builder, R. R. Constructions) along with one, Shri Swapneil Santosh Makel, for a consideration of Rs.101 lacs (vide Article of Agreement dated 24.03.2009/PB pgs.9 -18), claiming the entire amount of LTCG arising thus to her (at Rs.26,58,147/ -) as exempt. Of the total consideration, Rs.91 lacs, representing 90% thereof, is to be contributed by the assessee and the balance 10% by the other co -owner, a family member. During the year, the assessee paid Rs.40 lacs to the builder, besides another Rs.5,19,312/ - towards stamp duty & registration charges (PB pg.1) for the Radha Krishna (new) flat, and which formed the basis for the claim of deduction u/s.54F in its respect. The same was found not acceptable by the Assessing Officer (A.O.) in -as -much as the assessee had on the relevant date, i.e., the date of transfer of industrial gala, the original asset, more than one residential house, being:

(3.) WE have heard the parties, and perused the material on record.