22 October 2010
BC Sir there is a difference in the situation by Durgesh and the case law mentioned by you is that in this case the new property was purchased in the name of the son of the assessee where in the situation mentioned by Durgesh the assessee's son is only a co-owner / joint owner. In this case there is a ray of hope for arguing the investment is made in the name of assessee only while the sons name in registration document is a procedural aspect only.
I know the facts of the case. The land sold was also an agricultural land. But the intention of the legislature, to my understanding, is reinvestment should be in the name of assessee only. However sir, there is also a decision similar to your view in regard to section 54 concerning reinvestment in the name of assessee and wife. Thanks for giving a ray of hope to the assessee.
CAclubindia
