Section 54f

As per Income Tax Act, Section 139(5), Revised return can be filed only if the return of Income has been filed within the due date mentioned in 139(1) i.e., 31-July in case of individual

The return was filed in November being belated return under Section 139(4), Since the return has not been filed within due date it cannot be revised.

Your return can not be revised at any cost as it is belated. So let this Ltcg to be taxed after the expiry of three years. Till then,if your scheme allows, then withdraw the money for some other purpose. By doing this you can earn the money which you going to pay as interest and penalty(if any) for such taxation of ltcg. Alternatively if the asseese is in the mood to purchase the house and if scheme allows you to convert the purpose, you can go for that option.

pls solve dis query

x sold both a residential house ans unlisted shares.he got a capital gain of 20lacs in sale of house and 10lacs on sale of shares.out of total capital gain 30lacs he invested 25lcs in a new house property. my doubt is sec 54 and sec 54f spaeks about same i.e. is investment in new house property.but here x invested combined capital gain in one house can he do like dat??

now how to compute exemption u/s in 54 and 54f in this case if sales made on 30.4.2013 and purchase of old house property on 30.4.10 and purchaseof shares on 30.4.11

and purchase of new house is on 30.6.14

 

 

Hi Ritz

Since assesse is individual and so last date of filing of return is 31.07.2014, if it is not laible ot tax audit u/s 44AB. 

I think it is not liable to tax audit. So assesse has filed belated ITR. So it can not be revised now.

Now you have to wait for passing the 3 years.  

Hi Nandita,

Deduction u/s 54 is for on sale of residential house. and Decution u/s 54F is for on sale of any Long term capital asset.

54 talks about investment of Long term capital Gain while 54F talks about the investment of Net sale consideration. 

Now, u can go for both to 54F.

There is no need to make any changes in the return

Assessee is NOT DISENTITLED from exemption 

 

In the case of Satish Chandra Gupta v. Assessing Officer [1995] 54 ITD 508 and Tribunal after considering the provisions of section 54 as well as section 55 held that the claim cannot be denied on the ground that the construction the house started by the assessee was not completed within the stipulated period of three years and some work was carried out thereafter.  

 

 

  "Commissioner of Income-tax v. R.L. Sood :- The assessee had paid a  sum of2,39,850 out of the total sale consideration of2,75,000 for  the purchase of the flat within the period of one year from the date of sale  of his old residential house. Thus, on payment of a substantial amount in  terms of the agreement of purchase dated September 25, 1981, i.e., within  four days of the sale of his old property, the assessee acquired substantial  domain over the new residential flat within the specified period of one  year and complied with the requirements of section 54 of the Act. Merely  because the builder failed to hand over possession of the flat to the assesee within the period of one year, the assessee cannot be denied the benefit of the said benevolent provision. "

Read more at: /forum/details.asp?mod_id=177158&offset=1#.VJT5xl4AA