SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

G.C.GUPTA, MUKUL KR.SHRAWAT, N.S.SAINI
Alkaben B. Patel – Appellant
Versus
Income-tax Officer, Ward -14(2), Ahmedabad – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
P.L. Kureel, O.P. Vaishnav,U.S. Bhati

ORDER

Mukul Kumar Shrawat, Judicial Member - This Special Bench has been constituted vide an order U/s 255(3) of the I.T.Act (hereinafter mentioned as The Act) by the Hon'ble President, I.T.A.T. The question referred to us is reproduced below:

"Whether for the purpose of Section 54EC of IT Act, 1961, the period of investment of six months should be reckoned after the date of transfer or from the end of the month in which transfer of capital asset took place?"

1.1 It is desirable, as well, to reproduce the Grounds of Appeal raised by the assessee, as under :

'The Ld. CIT(A)-XXI, Ahmedabad has grossly erred in law and in facts in confirming the disallowance of legitimate investment made U/s 54 EC of Rs. 45,00,000/-. The Ld. A.O. may be directed to allow the legitimate deduction in respect of investment if NHAI Bonds U/s 54 EC of Rs. 45,00,000/-.

2. The Ld. CIT(A)-XXI, Ahmedabad has grossly erred in law in considering the last date for investment U/s 54EC as 10.12.2008 in place of 31.12.2008 as the 'month' would mean that the "full month" which reckoned from the end of the month in which transfer takes place. Therefore, he may be directed to consider the last date for making investment U/

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top