TMI Blog2011 (8) TMI 1208X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on behalf of the assessee. 3. In the Revenue s appeal, the Revenue has raised the following grounds : 1.a On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred in directing the A.O. to give deduction u/s 54F of ` 86,19,796/- by relying on the judgement of ITAT Mumbai Bench in the case of ITO vs Rasiklal N. Satra 280ITRSP 243. 1.b. The learned CIT(A) has failed to note that there are a number of judgements to the effect that the assessee is eligible for deduction u/s 54F even when the assessee acquires partial right in residential property. 1.c The learned CIT(A) has failed to appreciate the ratio of the judgement of ITAT Delhi-G Bench in the case of ITO Mrs. Kamlesh Bansal vs. ITO 109 TTJ 417 wherein i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... owner in two house properties and as the assessee held more than one residential house, the deduction u/s. 54F was not available to the assessee. It was the submission that the learned CIT(A) had held that the assessee was entitled to the deduction u/s 54F by holding that a joint owner of a house could not be held to be owning a residential house. It was the submission that on identical issue the ITAT Chennai Bench in the case of Dr. P.K. Vasanthi Rangarajan in ITA No. 1753/Mds/2004 dated 25-7-2005 had held that for the purpose of section 54F, owning part of the residential property, though not fully, amounts to owning a residential property as envisaged in section 54F. It was the submission that the learned CIT(A) had relied upon the decis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erpreted the term own for the purpose of section 32 and when a similar term is available in the provisions of section 54 the meaning would have to be given to the term own in section 54F. If this is applied, then it would be the decision of the co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal at Mumbai in the case of Rasiklal N. Satra which would have to be applied and as the assessee herein is only a part owner of the two residential properties, one being the 1/4th owner with his other and the another being owner with his sister, the assessee cannot be held to be owning a residential house as required for the purpose of the benefit u/s 54F. In the circumstances, we are of the view that the finding of the learned CIT(A) holding that the assessee is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
