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

2025 (1) TMI 1163

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ections of learned Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP). 2. The additional ground raised by the assessee vide letter dated 13.11.2023, stating that the directions issued by learned DRP under section 144C(5) of the Act dated 16.05.2023 does not bear the DIN Number, was stated to be not pressed by the learned AR at the time of hearing. The same is reckoned as a statement made from the bar and accordingly, the additional ground raised by the assessee is hereby dismissed as not pressed. 3. Though, the assessee has raised several grounds before us, the only effective issue to be decided in this appeal is as to whether the learned CIT(A) was justified in confirming the action of the learned AO in denying the claim of exemption under section 54F of th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 08.2010 and possessing of property still no provided by the builder. Not to be considered as House property and same is evident from the schedule House Property of ITR Yes 3. 1 BHK Studio Apartment, Sector -109, Gurgaon, Haryaya-122017 Booking amount of Rs. 30 lacs paid on 10.04.2014 to builder and possessing of property still not provided by the builder, since project under dispute. Not to be considered as House property and same it is evident from the schedule House property of ITR No 4. ½ share of Plot No. 10, Ground Floor & First Floor, Padmini Enclave, New Delhi-110018 Sale consideration of long-term capital assets invested in this residential property for claiming exemption u/s 54F. Registered sale deed of property date .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e, such property cannot be construed as a property owned by the assessee as on the date of transfer of original capital asset. 8. The Learned AO, however, did not heed to any of the aforesaid contentions and proceeded to deny exemption claimed by the assessee under section 54F of the Act in respect of reinvestment made in the property of Padmini Enclave on the ground that assessee was owning more than one house property as on the date of transfer of original capital asset. 9. We find that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of CIT Vs. Balbir Singh Maini reported in 398 ITR 531 (SC) and Suraj Lamp & Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Haryana reported in 340 ITR 1 (SC) had held that when possession of the property was not handed over to the as .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sidential house, the income of which is chargeable under the head 'Income from house property" (underlined ours). In other words, the expression "own any residential house" is used with a reference to the income of which is chargeable under the head "Income from house property". The Legislature has inserted sections 22 to 26 in the Income-tax Act for the purpose of determining the income, which is chargeable under the head "Income from house property" Section 22 to section 26 of the Act provides the manner of computing the income from house property chargeable to tax under the head "Income from house property". Section 22 charges to tax, in the hands of the owner, the annual value of house property. Section 23 lays down the manner of de .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the purpose of sections 22 to 26 of the Act." 11. We have gone through the said judgment and, in our considered opinion, the said judgement could be relied upon only for the limited proposition of the fact that registration of a property need not be made mandatory for determining as to whether a particular assessee could be construed as the owner of the residential property. It is important to note that in the case before Pune Tribunal, possession of the property was duly handed over to that assessee. Whereas, possession of the property in respect of property referred to in serial no. 2 and 3 in the above table, was not handed over to the assessee. Hence, we hold that the decision of Pune Tribunal is factually distinguishable with the as .....

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