TMI Blog2021 (6) TMI 663X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e plea of the assessee that even if the Department treat the residential unit as two different residential units and the assessee is entitled to claim exemption under section 54 of the Act in view of the decision in the case of CIT v. V.R. Karpagam (supra), we find that even though in V.R. Karpagam's [ 2014 (8) TMI 899 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] , the claim was raised under Section 54F of the Act the said case law would certainly apply to a case under Section 54 of the Act also because a bare reading of Sections 54 and 54F of the Act would reveal that the two provisions are in pari materia with regard to those aspects of provisions of law which we are concerned with in the instant case. While section 54 of the Act deals with capital gains ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessment year 2009-10 in directing the Assessing Officer to allow the deduction under section 54 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [ Act in short]. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and filed her return of income for the assessment year 2009-10 on 06.07.2011 declaring an income of ₹.2,90,72,790/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and the assessment under section 143(3)of the Act was completed on 29.11.2011 by making an addition of ₹.6,84,730/-. Since the assessee has offered the capital gain on sale of property less than the market value of the property contravening the provisions of section 50C of the Act and the assessee has claimed exemption under section 54 of the Act on the purchase of 2 flat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... asset and not new assets and therefore, the assessee is not entitled to claim the exemption under section 54 of the Act for more than one house and thus, the ld. DR pleaded for reversing the appellate order. On the other hand, the ld. Counsel for the assessee strongly supported the order of the ld. CIT(A) and prayed for sustaining the appellate order. 4. We have heard both the sides, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of authorities below including paper book filed by the assessee. Against the rejection of claim of exemption for the investment in two flats under section 54 of the Act, it was the submission before the ld. CIT(A) that the two flats are adjoining flats bearing Flat No. 802A and Flat No. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at No. 802A and Flat No. 802B are adjacent to each other and is a one residential property which has common passage/staircase, common kitchen and common entrance and common amenities as per the project of the builder. In view of the above factual position as well as case law relied on, the assessee is entitled to claim deduction under section 54 of the Act for the reinvestment of long term capital gain in acquisition of both the flats as one residential unit. 6. Against the alternate plea of the assessee that even if the Department treat the residential unit as two different residential units and the assessee is entitled to claim exemption under section 54 of the Act in view of the decision in the case of CIT v. V.R. Karpagam (supra), we ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
