1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.69/2009 Appellant :- The Commissioner of Income Tax – I, Aayakar Bhawan, Civil Lines, Nagpur. ...Versus... Respondent :- M/s. Bhikulal Chandak (HUF) 100, Abhanyankar Nagar, Nagpur. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [Shri Anand Parchure, Adv. for appellant] CORAM:- J.P. DEVADHAR AND A.B. CHAUDHARI, JJ. DATED :- 27.08.2010 In the present case the assessee in part performance of the contract for sale of immovable property had received advance payment which was deposited in specified bonds. The sale transaction was completed subsequently. The assessee claimed benefit under Section 54 EC of the Income Tax Act in respect of the investments which was allowed by A.O. C.I.T. by invoking powers under Section 263 of the Act sought to deny the benefit. The Tribunal allowed the benefit under Section 54 EC of the Income Tax Act by holding that the expression 'transfer' under Section 2 (47) of the Act has a wider meaning. In part performance of the contract if possession is handed over and there is nothing to show that the assessee has not complied any of the conditions set out in Section 54 EC of the Income Tax Act, we see no reason to interfere with the order of the Tribunal. The Income Tax Appeal is, therefore, dismissed. No order as to costs. JUDGE JUDGE SSW