MRS. NIRMALA SUBRAMANIAN,MUMBAI vs. CIT(A)-26, MUMBAI

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the appellate order passed by learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-26, Mumbai dated 26.06.2018 for A.Y. 2007-08. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:-

The appeal of the assessee is filed late causing delay of 250 days. Assessee has submitted an application of

Therefore, aggrieved with that order, assessee is in appeal before us on the solitary grounds.

The learned Authorized Representative vehemently referred to the documents placed at page no.13 to 79 of the Paper Book which is a purchase agreement of the new property. He submitted that for the purpose of section 54 of the Act purchase date of the property is required to be seen. He submitted that an agreement to sale was made by the assessee for property under construction. However, the possession was given later on and share certificate was also issued on 27th March, 2007. He further stated that as the possession of the property was granted later on, that date should be considered for the purpose of date of purchase of the property. He further referred to page no.8 of the agreement to show that the payment was to be made in installments during the construction period. He therefore, submitted that assessee is entitled to deduction under Section 54 of the Act. He submitted that the learned CIT (A) was also incorrect in stating that additional evidences submitted by the assessee are not admitted.

The learned Departmental Representative supported the orders of the lower authorities.

We have carefully considered the rival contention and perused the orders of the lower authorities. The short question in this appeal is whether the assessee is entitled to deduction under Section 54 of the Act or not and what

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.