MR.HEMANTH PUTTANNACHETTY VISWANATH ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-5(2)(4), BANGALORE
In the result, appeal by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purpose
ITA 3240/BANG/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Sept 2021AY 2015-16
Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B. R. Baskaranassessment Year : 2015-16 Shri. Hemanth Puttannachetty Viswanath, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. G-2, Brigade Hill View Apartment, Ward - 5(2)(4), Gavipuram, K. G. Nagar, Behind Rama Bengaluru. Krishna Ashram, Bengaluru – 560 019. Pan : Adspv 5271 H Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri. Rajeev Nulvi, Advocate Respondent By : Shri. Sankar Ganesh, Sr. Dr(Itat), Bengaluru Date Of Hearing : 06.09.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 08.09.2021 O R D E R Per N. V. Vasudevan: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 28.09.2018 Of Cit(A)-5, Bengaluru, Relating To Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The Only Issue That Arises For Consideration In This Appeal Is As To Whether The Revenue Authorities Were Justified In Bringing To Tax Long Term Capital Gain (Ltcg) At Rs.1,50,35,192/- On A Protective Basis In The Hands Of The Assessee.
For Appellant: Shri. Rajeev Nulvi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Sankar Ganesh, Sr. DR(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 54(2)Section 54F
house property other than the new asset which is used for claiming the deduction u/s. 54F. In the case of the assessee, he has acquired another flat within the specified time than the one claimed deduction u/s. 54F. Hence, he is not eligible for deduction u/s. 54F of the I.T. Act, 1961.”
10. Finally, the AO brought the capital gain
