Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2017 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (1) TMI 558 - AT - Income TaxEligibility to benefit u/s 54 - assessee has not produced evidence to show that the impugned house was in a habitable condition and it was occupied by someone, hence AO held that the asset originally transferred at Uttarahalli cannot be treated as a 'residential house' for the purpose of claiming benefit u/s. 54 but it could be treated as ‘land’ which qualifies for deduction u/s.54F - Held that:- The facts remain that as on 01.4.2010, the assessee had the residential property situated at No.7/232/415, Doddakallasandra village, Uttarahalli Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk which was purchased on 03.6 & 01.7.2006 and a flat at Brigade Gateway which was purchased on 16-10-2009. He sold the residential property situated at No.7/232/415, Doddakallasandra village, Uttarahalli for a consideration of Rs. one crore on 25-05-2010. The AO has held that the building at Uttarahalli cannot be treated as a 'residential house' for the purpose of claiming benefit u/s. 54 but the property could be treated as ‘land’ which qualifies for deduction u/s.54F. The assessee purchased another residential flat at F 1605, 16th floor, "Marigold" Block, The Gardens, Binnyston Garden, Magadi Road, Bangalore, on 16-06-2010 for a consideration of ₹ 57,77,137/-. Thus, as on 16.06.2010, other than the new asset at Magadi Road, the assessee has a flat at Brigade Gateway. So, he is entitled for a deduction u/s 54F on the investment made at Magadi Road property . Although, the assessee claimed such benefit before the AO & also before the CIT (A), as mentioned supra, his claim is not considered. Thus, his alternate plea is found meritorious and accordingly, the AO is directed to grant deduction on the investment made at Magadi Road property u/s 54F. The appeal is allowed to that extent.
|