ANAND PRAKASH, A.M.: short point for determination in this appeal is as to what would be quantum of exemption available to assessee under s. 54E of IT Act, 1961. assessee held certain shares which were sold by it during accounting period under consideration for Rs. 79,881. profit of Rs. 36,515 was earned on them. investment in unit trust to extent of Rs. 33,130 was made within six months of aforesaid sale. On basis of aforesaid facts, ITO worked out exemption under s. 54E as follows: (36,515 x 33,130)/69,780 = Rs. 15,163 assessee had, however, claimed exemption to extent of Rs. 28,382. aforesaid claim was worked out on basis of sale price of shares of Bharat commerce (I) Ltd. amounting to Rs. 32,678 wherein capital gain of Rs. 28,382 was earned. It was claim of assessee that unit trust was purchased out of sale price of Rs. 32,678 and inasmuch as cost of t h e unit trust was more than sale consideration, entire capital gain embedded therein ought to be exempted. aforesaid plea was not accepted by ITO prima facie on ground that no direct nexus between sale price of various share and purchase price of unit trust was established. All shares had been sold prior to acquisition of units. shares had been sold in between October, 1978 and December, 1978 and unit trust was purchased in February, 1979 and Marc, 1979. ITO, therefore, proceeded on footing that investment emanated out of total sale consideration of Rs. 79,881. ld. AAC has confirmed to working given by ITO more or less for same reason. assessee challenges aforesaid computation as erroneous and it is pointed out that sale proceeds of shares of Bharat Commerce (I) Ltd. were available with assessee and out of aforesaid sale proceeds, assessee could make purchase in question and, therefore, Department should not have doubted assertion of assessee that sale proceed of shares of Bharat Commerce (I) Ltd. was invested in Unit Trust of India. On behalf of Revenue, order of authorities below were supported. After taking into consideration facts of case as above, I am of opinion that benefit of doubt with regard to factual position should be given to assessee, as it is not possible on basis of available records to show as to out of what sale proceeds unit trusts in question were acquired. When this be position, assessee should be given benefit of appropriating sale proceeds of different assets to purchase price of unit trusts. assessee has chosen to co-relate sale price of Bharat Commerce (I) Ltd. shares with purchase price of unit trust. This is probable and, therefore, I would grant embedded in sale price of Bharat Commerce (I) Ltd. which deserves to be exempted in terms of s. 54E(1)(a). In result, appeal stands allowed. *** K. N. SAHGAL, EXECUTOR TO ESTATE OF LATE H. N. SAHGAL v. INCOME TAX OFFICER