TMI Blog1981 (4) TMI 94X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h the relevant valuation dates being March 31, 1973, and March 31, 1974, respectively. The assessee started construction of a house in the assessment year 1972-73, and the same was completed in the assessment year 1975-76. Up to the valuation date, March 31, 1973, the assessee had invested about Rs. 59,000 inclusive of cost of land at Rs. 7,000 and up to March 31, 1974, the investment was to the tune of Rs. 79,690. Assessee claimed exemption in respect of the house under s. 5(1)(iv) of the Act, but the claim for exemption was rejected by the WTO on the footing that the house was incomplete and the work being in progress it could not be considered to be a " house " within the meaning of s. 5(1)(iv) of the Act so as to entitle its value to be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee... (iv) one house or part of a house belonging to the assessee ........" The original provision of exemption read thus: " One house belonging to the assessee exclusively used by him for residential purposes and situate in any place with a population not exceeding ten thousand and which is more than five miles distant from any area for which, there is a municipality the population whereof exceeds ten thousand." The above provision was for the first time amended by the Finance Act of 1964, with effect from April 1, 1964, and after the amendment the provision reads thus: " One house or part of a house belonging to the assessee exclusively used by him for residential purposes: " The material amendment to the aforesaid provision came by the F ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nse meaning of a house. In the instant case, there is no clear finding by the Tribunal as to whether with the investment made during the two relevant years, the construction had reached a habitable stage. Merely from the fact that something more remained to be done in the year beyond the two years in review, it may not be presumed that the house had not come to a habitable condition on the valuation dates. While we do not agree with the assessee's counsel that habitability is not the test, we are of the view that the Tribunal would do well in recording a finding as to the substantial position of the construction on the two relevant dates. If it reaches the conclusion that the construction had reached a habitable stage, that would amount to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
