Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram
Discussions Forum
Home Forum Income Tax This
A Public Forum.
Anyone can participate to share knowledge.
We acknowledge the contributions of Experts/ Authors.

Submit new Issue / Query

Int paid during construction period is treated as cost, Income Tax

Issue Id: - 3289
Dated: 20-8-2011
By:- GOPAL GUPTA

Int paid during construction period is treated as cost


  • Contents

Dear Sir

Mr X has booked a flat in Jaipur ( Raj. )  with a private builder in June 2007  and  to pay the cost of flat  he has taken a housing loan . The possession of the 

said flat was taken in Dec 2009. Now Mr X sold the flat in August 2010 and has purhcases  another flat in Sept 2010  .

1. Whether he can take benefit of  long term capital gain as the period of  date of booking and date of sale is more 36 months or only date of possession will count for the purpose of Long term capital gain. Please give your opinion looking to the recent judgement of Pun and Har court and also of  Bombay HC.

2. In case it is treated as short term capital gain,   whether Mr X can treat the interest paid as cost of acquisition of the assets. Please give  the opinion on the basis of some  case laws. 

Posts / Replies

Showing Replies 1 to 1 of 1 Records

Page: 1


1 Dated: 10-9-2011
By:- Surender Gupta

It will be treated as long term capital gain from the date of agreement. Provisions of section 2(47) have been analysed by the Madras High Court in MADATHIL BROTHERS Versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (2007 -TMI - 4563 - MADRAS HIGH COURT). HC has examined the issue in detail with reasons of amendment and applicability of Supreme Court Decision in the matter of C.I.T. Vs. PODAR CEMENT PVT. LTD (1997 -TMI - 5598 - SUPREME Court) in the present matter.

The capital gain arising on the  transfer of  capital assets has to be worked out from the date of the agreement under which the assessee was put in possession  of the  property.

You may also see:

Decision of the Punjab and  Haryana  High Court  reported in (C.I.T. Vs. VED  PARKASH  AND SONS  (HUF) [1993 -TMI - 20244 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA High Court]),  the  decisions of the  Rajasthan  High  Court reported  in  (C.I.T. Vs.  VISHNU  TRADING  AND INVESTMENT CO [2002 -TMI - 12246 - RAJASTHAN High Court ]) and (C.I.T. Vs. RAJASTHAN MIRROR MANUFACTURING  CO [2002 -TMI - 12098 - RAJASTHAN High Court ]) as well as the decision  of  the  Andhra Pradesh  High  Court reported in (M.SYAMALA  RAO Vs.  C.I.T [1998 -TMI - 16643 - ANDHRA PRADESH High Court]),


Page: 1

Old Query - New Comments are closed.

Quick Updates:Latest Updates