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

TMI Blog

Home

2013 (10) TMI 1571

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... and are being disposed of by the single consolidated order. ITA.No.465/Hyd/2013 A.Y. 2009-2010 : 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return of income on 30.7.2009 declaring NIL income. The assessee had entered into a development agreement for land owned by him and claimed deduction under section 54 of the Act against the capital gains on the transfer of land to the developer. The Assessing Officer recomputed the capital gains by making adjustments to the value of the consideration received and to the cost of acquisition claimed by the assessee and also restricting the deduction under section 54. The Assessing Officer assessed the total income at Rs.52,05,530/- of long term capital gains. 3. Aggrie .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of CIT vs. D. Anand Basappa (2009) 309 ITR 329 (Kar.) and CIT vs. K.G. Rukminamma (2011) 331 ITR 211 (Kar.) (supra) are to be followed. The learned A.R. however admitted before the CIT(A) that the four flats were totally independent and were not interconnected with common passage, common kitchen etc. The AR submitted that since all four flats were in the same building and have been acquired at the same time, the requirement of common passage, common kitchen etc. was not applicable in the light of the decisions in the cases of Rukminamma and Anand Basappa. 4. After perusing the records and after hearing the submissions of the learned A.R. the CIT(A) observed at para 7.3 of his order that the decision cited by the Assessing Officer is of t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in ITA.No.422 to 424/Hyd/2013 dated 10.07.2013 in the cases of Vittal Krishna Conjeevaram, Secunderabad and others vs. ITO, Ward 10(4), Hyderabad have also followed the decisions of Hon ble Karnataka High Court in the cases of CIT vs. D. Anand Basappa (2009) 309 ITR 329 (Kar.) and CIT vs. K.G. Rukminamma (2011) 331 ITR 211 (Kar.) (supra) and the relevant observations of the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal are as under : 8. . . . . .However, the Hon ble Karnataka High Court while interpreting the words a residential house as appears in section 54 of the Act in case of CIT vs. Smt. K.G. Rukmini Amma 331 ITR 211 following its earlier decision in case of CIT vs. D.Anand Basappa 309 ITR 329 have held .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sferred and four flats in a single residential complex were purchased by the assessee, it was held that all the four residential flats constituted a residential house for the purpose of section 54 and that the four residential flats cannot be construed as four residential houses for the purpose of section 54. Admittedly, the two flats purchased by the assessee are adjacent to one another and have a common meeting point. In the impugned order, the Tribunal has also relied upon the decisions in K. G. Vyas' case (supra), P.e. Ramakrishna, HUF's case (supra) and Prem Prakash Bhutani's case (supra) wherein it was held that exemption under section 54 only requires that the property should be of residential nature and the fact that t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e expression a residential house appearing in sections 54 and 54F of the Act, would mean that exemption would be allowable in respect of investment in a single residential house only. However, it is to be seen that the aforesaid decision of the ITAT, Mumbai Special Bench has been disapproved by the jurisdictional High Court in case of CIT vs. Syed Ali (supra). Hence, the decision of the ITAT, Mumbai Special Bench no longer can be considered to be a good law. Therefore, considering the totality of the facts and circumstances in the light of consistent view of different High Courts including the jurisdictional High Court, we are of the view that the lower authorities were not correct in restricting the exemption under section 54F of the Act .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates