D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-3(1), KOLKATA vs. SMT. SHIKHA ROY, KOLKATA

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘B’ BENCH, KOLKATA VIRTUAL COURT HEARING (Before Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’ble Accountant Member & Sri S.S. Godara, Hon’ble Judicial Member) ITA No. 1915/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Kolkata................……………….….........Appellant Vs. Smt. Shikha Roy........................................................................…..…………..................……………..Respondent 91/1, Southern Avenue Ballygunge Kolkata – 700 029 [PAN : ACZPR 9690 L] Appearances by: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate, appeared on behalf of the assessee. Shri Imokaba Jamir, CIT D/R, appearing on behalf of the Revenue. Date of concluding the hearing : October 21st, 2020 Date of pronouncing the order : November 25th, 2020 ORDER Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, AM :- This appeal filed by the revenue is directed against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 1, (hereinafter the “ld. CIT(A)”), passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the ‘Act’), dt. 01/05/2019, for the Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. There is a delay of 9 (nine) days in filing of this appeal. After perusing the petition for condonation of delay, we are convinced that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause in filing the appeal in time. Hence, we condone the delay and admit this appeal. 3. The assessee is an individual and filed her return of income for the Assessment Year 2016-17 on 28/06/2016, declaring total income of Rs.6,21,37,340/-. In this return of income, she declared income from rent from house property and long term capital gains from sale of tenancy rights, in addition to interest from fixed deposits. Her case was selected for scrutiny and notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act on 23/12/2015, determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.11,93,42,172/- interalia rejecting the claim of deduction of the assessee u/s 54EC of the Act of Rs.50,00,000/- and deduction u/s 54F of the Act of Rs.5,00,00,000/-, on the ground that the amount of Rs.10,00,00,000/- was received by the assessee, just as compensation for vacating the tenancy and hence the

2 ITA No. 1915/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Smt. Shikha Roy receipt is taxable under the head “Business I receipt is taxable under the head “Business Income”. The Assessing Officer rejected the . The Assessing Officer rejected the claim of the assessee that th ee that this income is taxable under the head “Capital Gains” “Capital Gains”. The Assessing Officer has given his reasons for coming to such a conclusion at Para 4 of his Assessing Officer has given his reasons for coming to such a conclusion at Para 4 of his Assessing Officer has given his reasons for coming to such a conclusion at Para 4 of his assessment order. 3.1. Aggrieved the assessee carried the matter in appeal. The ld. First Appellate Aggrieved the assessee carried the matter in appeal. The ld. First Appellate Aggrieved the assessee carried the matter in appeal. The ld. First Appellate Authority admitted the additional evidence furnished by the assessee and thereafter Authority admitted the additional evidence furnished by the assessee and thereafter Authority admitted the additional evidence furnished by the assessee and thereafter called for remand report from the Assessing Officer. As the Assessing Officer failed to called for remand report from the Assessing Officer. As the Assessing Officer failed to called for remand report from the Assessing Officer. As the Assessing Officer failed to respond, the ld. CIT(A) examined the documents furnished by the assessee and came to respond, the ld. CIT(A) examined the documents furnished by the assessee and came to respond, the ld. CIT(A) examined the documents furnished by the assessee and came to a conclusion that, consideration received by the assessee under surrender of tenancy consideration received by the assessee under surrender of tenancy consideration received by the assessee under surrender of tenancy rights is assessable as capital gains and, therefore, taxable under the head “capital rights is assessable as capital gains and, therefore, taxable under the head “capital rights is assessable as capital gains and, therefore, taxable under the head “capital gains”. He allowed the claim of the assessee for allowed the claim of the assessee for deduction both u/s 54F as well as u deduction both u/s 54F as well as u/s 54EC of the Act. 4. Aggrieved the Revenue is in appeal before us. Aggrieved the Revenue is in appeal before us. 5. The ld. D/R, relied on the order of the Assessing Officer and drew our attention The ld. D/R, relied on the order of the Assessing Officer and drew our attention The ld. D/R, relied on the order of the Assessing Officer and drew our attention to page 2 para 4 of his order and submitted that the assessee could not furnish any 4 of his order and submitted that the assessee could not furnish any 4 of his order and submitted that the assessee could not furnish any evidence of rent payment to prove its to prove its the claim of having tenancy rights. He further tenancy rights. He further pointed out that the assessee had claimed that she would be entitled to interest after 10 pointed out that the assessee had claimed that she would be entitled to interest after 10 pointed out that the assessee had claimed that she would be entitled to interest after 10 years on the construction loan given e construction loan given by her to the landlord of Rs.8,00,000/ to the landlord of Rs.8,00,000/- but the supplementary deed shows that the interest would accrue supplementary deed shows that the interest would accrue to the assessee after 10 to the assessee after 10 years. He argued that the assessee had not the assessee had not admitted any interest income thereon or any interest income thereon or furnished evidence of repayment of of repayment of the construction loan. He argued that the He argued that the assessee has not paid any price for purchasing of tenancy rights has not paid any price for purchasing of tenancy rights and hence the cost of acquisition and hence the cost of acquisition is anyway –NIL-. He pointed out that He pointed out that the supplementary agreement dt. 08/04/1994 the supplementary agreement dt. 08/04/1994 between the landlord and the tenant was not a registered d rd and the tenant was not a registered document, and ocument, and that the daughter-in-law of the landlord was the purchaser. He pointed out that the landlord had law of the landlord was the purchaser. He pointed out that the landlord had law of the landlord was the purchaser. He pointed out that the landlord had given a loan fund to the daughter given a loan fund to the daughter-in-law, which was in turn paid to the assessee and law, which was in turn paid to the assessee and hence it was only compensation paid for vacating the flat. He submitted that the cost of pensation paid for vacating the flat. He submitted that the cost of pensation paid for vacating the flat. He submitted that the cost of acquisition was claimed as the construction loan given and the interest accrued thereon. acquisition was claimed as the construction loan given and the interest accrued thereon. acquisition was claimed as the construction loan given and the interest accrued thereon. He submitted that the Assessing Officer was right in bringing to Assessing Officer was right in bringing to tax tax, the amount in question as business income. He drew the attention of the Bench to the order of the ld. iness income. He drew the attention of the Bench to the order of the ld. iness income. He drew the attention of the Bench to the order of the ld. CIT(A) and submitted that additional evidence was admitted, based on which the ld. CIT(A) and submitted that additional evidence was admitted, based on which the ld. CIT(A) and submitted that additional evidence was admitted, based on which the ld.

3 ITA No. 1915/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Smt. Shikha Roy CIT(A) had taken a decision without giving adequate opportunity to the Assessing CIT(A) had taken a decision without giving adequate opportunity to the Assessing CIT(A) had taken a decision without giving adequate opportunity to the Assessing Officer. He submitted that the ld. CIT(A) ed that the ld. CIT(A) should have given further time to the Assessing given further time to the Assessing Officer to go through the ad Officer to go through the additional evidence and then give his view. He prayed for his view. He prayed for relief. 6. The ld. Counsel for the assessee, on the other hand, submitted that this is a The ld. Counsel for the assessee, on the other hand, submitted that this is a The ld. Counsel for the assessee, on the other hand, submitted that this is a straightforward case where the assessee had ard case where the assessee had obtained tenancy rights in respect of the obtained tenancy rights in respect of the flats by agreeing to pay Rs.8,00,000/ flats by agreeing to pay Rs.8,00,000/- by way of construction loan and this by way of construction loan and this fact was supported by “Articles of Agreement” “Articles of Agreement” dt. 08/04/1994. This loan carried an interest of . 08/04/1994. This loan carried an interest of 4% which accrues on the expiry of 10 years. He pointed out to various clauses in these 4% which accrues on the expiry of 10 years. He pointed out to various clauses in these 4% which accrues on the expiry of 10 years. He pointed out to various clauses in these “Articles of Agreement” to demonstrate that the assessee had acquired tenancy rights. to demonstrate that the assessee had acquired tenancy rights. to demonstrate that the assessee had acquired tenancy rights. He relied on Section 2(47) of the Ac of the Act and on various case-law for the proposition that law for the proposition that transfer of tenancy rights would tantamount to transfer of capital asset. He submitted transfer of tenancy rights would tantamount to transfer of capital asset. He submitted transfer of tenancy rights would tantamount to transfer of capital asset. He submitted that these being old documents, the assessee required certain time to that these being old documents, the assessee required certain time to that these being old documents, the assessee required certain time to collate the same and that loan payment receipts payment receipts etc. for the previous years were produced before the ld. for the previous years were produced before the ld. CIT(A). He relied on the order of the ld. CIT(A) and prayed that the same may be upheld. CIT(A). He relied on the order of the ld. CIT(A) and prayed that the same may be upheld. CIT(A). He relied on the order of the ld. CIT(A) and prayed that the same may be upheld. 7. We have heard rival contentions. On careful consideration of the facts and We have heard rival contentions. On careful consideration of the facts and We have heard rival contentions. On careful consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, perus circumstances of the case, perusal of the papers on record, orders of the authorities al of the papers on record, orders of the authorities below as well as case law cited, we hold as follows: below as well as case law cited, we hold as follows:- 8. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the Article of Agreement dated The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the Article of Agreement dated The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the Article of Agreement dated 08/12/1994 specifies that “For the purpose of obtaining the said “For the purpose of obtaining the said tenancy rights in respect of the said Flat the tenant tenancy rights in respect of the said Flat the tenant hereby agrees to pay to the landlord Rs.8,00,000/ hereby agrees to pay to the landlord Rs.8,00,000/- by way of construction loan and the by way of construction loan and the same shall be paid as under:- - (i) Rs.8,00,000/- against possession of the flat. against possession of the flat. The tenancy in respect of the The tenancy in respect of the said Flat in favour of the tenant shall (provided the tenant said Flat in favour of the tenant shall (provided the tenant shall have paid the entire construction loan of Rs.8,00,000/ shall have paid the entire construction loan of Rs.8,00,000/- as aforesaid) begin as aforesaid) begin immediately on the landlord obtaining Occupation Certificate in respect of the said Flat immediately on the landlord obtaining Occupation Certificate in respect of the said Flat immediately on the landlord obtaining Occupation Certificate in respect of the said Flat from the Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay and without any further act or consent ration of Greater Bombay and without any further act or consent ration of Greater Bombay and without any further act or consent on the part of the Landlord.

4 ITA No. 1915/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Smt. Shikha Roy The payment of Rs.8,00,000/ he payment of Rs.8,00,000/- as construction loan was made through normal as construction loan was made through normal banking channels on 08/12/1994 against acquisition of the tenancy rights and banking channels on 08/12/1994 against acquisition of the tenancy rights and banking channels on 08/12/1994 against acquisition of the tenancy rights and this tenancy in respect of this flat was acquired by the assessee from such date. in respect of this flat was acquired by the assessee from such date. in respect of this flat was acquired by the assessee from such date. The impugned construction loan of Rs.8,00,000/ impugned construction loan of Rs.8,00,000/- was given to the landlord for construction was given to the landlord for construction of the building which was given which was given on monthly rent, to the assessee. The said construction he said construction loan of Rs.8,00,000/- is directly linked with the acquisition of the Tenancy Rights. is directly linked with the acquisition of the Tenancy Rights. is directly linked with the acquisition of the Tenancy Rights. Although there was a clause in the Article of Agreement dated 08/12/1994 that the lthough there was a clause in the Article of Agreement dated 08/12/1994 that the lthough there was a clause in the Article of Agreement dated 08/12/1994 that the construction loan shall be repaid by the Landlord to the tenant with interest thereon of construction loan shall be repaid by the Landlord to the tenant with interest thereon of construction loan shall be repaid by the Landlord to the tenant with interest thereon of 4% p.a. after the expiry of 10 years, the said loan of Rs.8,00,000/ after the expiry of 10 years, the said loan of Rs.8,00,000/ after the expiry of 10 years, the said loan of Rs.8,00,000/- or any interest thereon was never repaid by the landlord by the landlord to the assessee. Hence, the said payment of to the assessee. Hence, the said payment of Rs.8,00,000/- was rightly claimed as Cost of Acquisition in computation of Capital Gains. was rightly claimed as Cost of Acquisition in computation of Capital Gains. was rightly claimed as Cost of Acquisition in computation of Capital Gains. Hence, the allegation of the Assessing Officer that the assessee had not paid any price ce, the allegation of the Assessing Officer that the assessee had not paid any price ce, the allegation of the Assessing Officer that the assessee had not paid any price for purchasing the tenancy rights, is not true. for purchasing the tenancy rights, is not true. 8.1. On these facts, the issue is whether the transfer of tenancy rights is transfer of On these facts, the issue is whether the transfer of tenancy rights is transfer of On these facts, the issue is whether the transfer of tenancy rights is transfer of capital asset or not. 9. The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of le Calcutta High Court in the case of A. Gasper vs. CIT A. Gasper vs. CIT reported in (1979) 117 ITR 581 (Cal.)., has held as follows: (1979) 117 ITR 581 (Cal.)., has held as follows:- “21. In view of the aforesaid facts, the contention of Mr, Banerjee 21. In view of the aforesaid facts, the contention of Mr, Banerjee, namely, that the , namely, that the monthly tenancy of the assessee was not a transferable property must fail both in monthly tenancy of the assessee was not a transferable property must fail both in monthly tenancy of the assessee was not a transferable property must fail both in law and in fact. It must also be held that the monthly tenancy of the assessee It must also be held that the monthly tenancy of the assessee It must also be held that the monthly tenancy of the assessee was a capital asset as defined in was a capital asset as defined in Section 2(14) of the I.T. Act, 1961. of the I.T. Act, 1961. 22. Section 2(47) of the I.T. Act, 1961, says that "transfer, in relation to capital of the I.T. Act, 1961, says that "transfer, in relation to capital of the I.T. Act, 1961, says that "transfer, in relation to capital asset, includes the sale, exchange or relinquishment of the asset or the asset, includes the sale, exchange or relinquishment of the asset or the asset, includes the sale, exchange or relinquishment of the asset or the extinguishment of any rights therein or the compulsory acquisition thereof under xtinguishment of any rights therein or the compulsory acquisition thereof under xtinguishment of any rights therein or the compulsory acquisition thereof under any law". Therefore, the contention of Mr. Banerjee that no capital asset has been any law". Therefore, the contention of Mr. Banerjee that no capital asset has been any law". Therefore, the contention of Mr. Banerjee that no capital asset has been transferred must be rejected because the assessee's monthly tenancy right or the transferred must be rejected because the assessee's monthly tenancy right or the transferred must be rejected because the assessee's monthly tenancy right or the leasehold right is a capital asset and it has been transferred to the Associated ght is a capital asset and it has been transferred to the Associated ght is a capital asset and it has been transferred to the Associated Batteries with the consent of the landlords and on such transfer his rights in it Batteries with the consent of the landlords and on such transfer his rights in it Batteries with the consent of the landlords and on such transfer his rights in it stood extinguished. Section 45(1) of the Act is wholly silent as to the person from whom the of the Act is wholly silent as to the person from whom the of the Act is wholly silent as to the person from whom the consideration money for transferring a capital asset is to be received by the consideration money for transferring a capital asset is to be received by the consideration money for transferring a capital asset is to be received by the assessee. Moreover, it, inter alia, provides that any profits or gains arising from assessee. Moreover, it, inter alia, provides that any profits or gains arising from assessee. Moreover, it, inter alia, provides that any profits or gains arising from the transfer of a capital asset sh the transfer of a capital asset shall be chargeable to income-tax under the head tax under the head "Capital gains". The assessee has transferred this capital asset to the Associated "Capital gains". The assessee has transferred this capital asset to the Associated "Capital gains". The assessee has transferred this capital asset to the Associated Batteries from whom it has received the aforesaid amount and, therefore, it must Batteries from whom it has received the aforesaid amount and, therefore, it must Batteries from whom it has received the aforesaid amount and, therefore, it must be held that this receipt is assessable to ta be held that this receipt is assessable to tax as the capital gains in the hands of the x as the capital gains in the hands of the assessee.

5 ITA No. 1915/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Smt. Shikha Roy 28. Further, simultaneously with the aforesaid transfer the right of the assessee in 28. Further, simultaneously with the aforesaid transfer the right of the assessee in 28. Further, simultaneously with the aforesaid transfer the right of the assessee in the monthly tenancy under the landlords or his leasehold interest was the monthly tenancy under the landlords or his leasehold interest was the monthly tenancy under the landlords or his leasehold interest was extinguished and, therefore, it does not matter extinguished and, therefore, it does not matter in the least that the aforesaid in the least that the aforesaid amount was not received from the landlords for the extinguishment of his amount was not received from the landlords for the extinguishment of his amount was not received from the landlords for the extinguishment of his aforesaid rights in the aforesaid capital asset, for, as already stated, aforesaid rights in the aforesaid capital asset, for, as already stated, Section 45(1) Section 45(1) of the Act does not say from whom the consideration money is to be received for es not say from whom the consideration money is to be received for es not say from whom the consideration money is to be received for transfer of a capital asset and, further, transfer of a capital asset and, further, Section 2(47) of the Act says that the word of the Act says that the word "transfer", in relation to a capital asset, includes "transfer", in relation to a capital asset, includes "the extinguishment of any rights "the extinguishment of any rights therein". 9.1. This judgment was affirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dated This judgment was affirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dated This judgment was affirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dated 21/08/1991 reported in [1991] 192 ITR 382 (SC). 21/08/1991 reported in [1991] 192 ITR 382 (SC). 10. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. D.P. Sandu Bros. Chembur CIT vs. D.P. Sandu Bros. Chembur (P) Ltd. [2005] 142 Taxman 713 (SC) [2005] 142 Taxman 713 (SC), held as follows:- “Section 45 of the Income of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Capital gains - Chargeable as - Assessment Assessment year 1987-88 - Respondent/assessee surrendered its tenancy right to lessor Respondent/assessee surrendered its tenancy right to lessor Respondent/assessee surrendered its tenancy right to lessor prematurely in consideration of which it received a sum of Rs. 35 lakhs prematurely in consideration of which it received a sum of Rs. 35 lakhs - Assessing Assessing Officer held that amount in question was taxable as 'income from other sources' under t in question was taxable as 'income from other sources' under t in question was taxable as 'income from other sources' under section 56 read with section 10(3) section 56 read with section 10(3) - On appeal, Commissioner (Appeals) held that On appeal, Commissioner (Appeals) held that assessee was liable to pay capital gains on amount received after deducting certain assessee was liable to pay capital gains on amount received after deducting certain assessee was liable to pay capital gains on amount received after deducting certain amount as cost of acquisitio amount as cost of acquisition - On cross appeals, Tribunal, however, came to On cross appeals, Tribunal, however, came to conclusion that cost incurred by assessee to acquire leasehold rights was incapable of conclusion that cost incurred by assessee to acquire leasehold rights was incapable of conclusion that cost incurred by assessee to acquire leasehold rights was incapable of being ascertained and, therefore, capital gains could not be computed as envisaged in being ascertained and, therefore, capital gains could not be computed as envisaged in being ascertained and, therefore, capital gains could not be computed as envisaged in section 48, and, consequently, cap section 48, and, consequently, capital gains earned by assessee, if any, was not exigible ital gains earned by assessee, if any, was not exigible to tax - High Court affirmed Tribunal's order High Court affirmed Tribunal's order - Whether since stand taken by Whether since stand taken by department before High Court was that cost of acquisition of tenancy was incapable of department before High Court was that cost of acquisition of tenancy was incapable of department before High Court was that cost of acquisition of tenancy was incapable of being ascertained, High Court was cor being ascertained, High Court was correct in affirming order passed by Tribunal rect in affirming order passed by Tribunal - Held, yes - Whether in view of finding that section 45 could not be applied, it was not open to Whether in view of finding that section 45 could not be applied, it was not open to Whether in view of finding that section 45 could not be applied, it was not open to Held, yes department to impose tax on capital receipt under any other section department to impose tax on capital receipt under any other section - Held, yes 12. Applying the proposition of law Applying the proposition of law laid down in these judgments to the facts of the laid down in these judgments to the facts of the case on hand, we have to necessarily upho case on hand, we have to necessarily uphold the order of the ld. CIT(A) that the assessee ld the order of the ld. CIT(A) that the assessee had acquired a capital asset in the form of tenancy rights and the transfer of this capital had acquired a capital asset in the form of tenancy rights and the transfer of this capital had acquired a capital asset in the form of tenancy rights and the transfer of this capital asset results in capital gains, which is taxable under the head “Capital Gains”. gains, which is taxable under the head “Capital Gains”. gains, which is taxable under the head “Capital Gains”. 13. The Assessing Officer rejected the claim of the assessee that transfer of tenancy The Assessing Officer rejected the claim of the assessee that transfer of tenancy The Assessing Officer rejected the claim of the assessee that transfer of tenancy rights will be assessed under the head capital gains on the ground that no purchase rights will be assessed under the head capital gains on the ground that no purchase rights will be assessed under the head capital gains on the ground that no purchase price was paid for the tenanc price was paid for the tenancy. A loan of Rs.8,00,000/- was given as construction loan was given as construction loan which was refundable. In the articles of agreement dt. 08/12/1994 at page 4.4., it is stated as follows: In the articles of agreement dt. 08/12/1994 at page 4.4., it is stated as follows: In the articles of agreement dt. 08/12/1994 at page 4.4., it is stated as follows:- “For the purpose of obtaining the said tenancy rights in respect of the said Flat the “For the purpose of obtaining the said tenancy rights in respect of the said Flat the “For the purpose of obtaining the said tenancy rights in respect of the said Flat the tenant hereby agrees to pay to the landlord Rs.8,00,000/ hereby agrees to pay to the landlord Rs.8,00,000/- by way of construction by way of construction loan and the same shall be paid as under: loan and the same shall be paid as under:-

6 ITA No. 1915/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Smt. Shikha Roy (i) Rs.8,00,000/- against possession of the flat. against possession of the flat. This loan is directly linked to the tenancy rights and it is, in a way, consideration This loan is directly linked to the tenancy rights and it is, in a way, consideration This loan is directly linked to the tenancy rights and it is, in a way, consideration for obtaining the rights. Even if the assessee has not paid any amount for purchase of for obtaining the rights. Even if the assessee has not paid any amount for purchase of for obtaining the rights. Even if the assessee has not paid any amount for purchase of tenancy rights, the nature of rights would remain tenancy right and this is a capital tenancy rights, the nature of rights would remain tenancy right and this is a capital tenancy rights, the nature of rights would remain tenancy right and this is a capital asset. Section 55(2)(a) of the Act clearly stipulates that in case no price is paid asset. Section 55(2)(a) of the Act clearly stipulates that in case no price is paid asset. Section 55(2)(a) of the Act clearly stipulates that in case no price is paid for acquisition of an asset mentioned in clause (a) to Section 55(2) of the Act, then the cost acquisition of an asset mentioned in clause (a) to Section 55(2) of the Act, then the cost acquisition of an asset mentioned in clause (a) to Section 55(2) of the Act, then the cost shall be taken as Nil. Hence the Assessing Officer was legally incorrect in his view. Thus, Hence the Assessing Officer was legally incorrect in his view. Thus, Hence the Assessing Officer was legally incorrect in his view. Thus, we uphold the finding of the ld. CIT(A) on this issue. we uphold the finding of the ld. CIT(A) on this issue. 14. Ground No. 4 & 5 are on the deduction u/s 54EC and 54F of the Act. As the main o. 4 & 5 are on the deduction u/s 54EC and 54F of the Act. As the main o. 4 & 5 are on the deduction u/s 54EC and 54F of the Act. As the main question as to whether the assessee has rightly whether the assessee has rightly offered the income from offered the income from the surrender of tenancy rights, under the head “Capital Gains” has been under the head “Capital Gains” has been held in favour of the assessee held in favour of the assessee and as all the conditions prescribed for as all the conditions prescribed for grant of claim of deduction u/s 54EC and u/s 54 claim of deduction u/s 54EC and u/s 54 of the Act, are met, in our view, the ld. CIT(A) has rightly granted relief to the assessee. of the Act, are met, in our view, the ld. CIT(A) has rightly granted relief to the assessee. of the Act, are met, in our view, the ld. CIT(A) has rightly granted relief to the assessee. 15. In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed. In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed.

Kolkata, the Kolkata, the 25th day of November, 2020 20. Sd/- Sd/- J. Sudhakar Reddy] [S. S. Godara] [J. Sudhakar Reddy Judicial Member Accountant Member Accountant Member Dated : 25.11.2020 {SC SPS}

7 ITA No. 1915/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Smt. Shikha Roy Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Smt. Shikha Roy 91/1, Southern Avenue Ballygunge Kolkata – 700 029