2019 (1) TMI 1470 - HC - Income Tax

Additional expenditure on repairs to qualify for the deduction u/s 54 - ITAT treating the expenditure incurred by the assessee over and above the actual cost of the new property to make it habitable as part of acquisition cost - additional expense is more than that the actual cost of the property - Held that - Tribunal has recorded the facts. The assessee had pointed out that he had acquired the flat which was a bareshell which required further expenditure to make it habitual. The assessee had to undertake renovation, tiles, furnitures and fixtures had to be fitted as per the instructions of the assessee. The Tribunal thereupon concluded that the Revenue was not correct in questioning such expenditure. We notice that the Tribunal had relied on the decision of the Division Bench of Punjab and Haryana High Court in case of Ashok Syal Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax (2012 (10) TMI 203 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT) in which somewhat similar view was taken. Eventually, the entire issue is based on facts. The Tribunal has assessed the facts on record and accepted the assessee s claim that the expenditure was shown to make the unit habitable - No question of law arises

Summary

Issues:
1. Whether the expenditure incurred by the assessee over and above the actual cost of the new property to make it habitable can be treated as part of the acquisition cost under Section 54 of the Income Tax Act, 1961?

Analysis:

Issue 1:
The issue in this case pertains to the Assessment Year 2007-2008, where the Revenue challenged the deduction claimed by the assessee for an expenditure of &8377; 1.73 crores in renovating a flat purchased by him under Section 54 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee had initially purchased a flat for &8377; 1.10 crores and incurred additional expenses to make it habitable, which was the subject of contention. The Assessing Officer disallowed the additional expenditure as a deduction, leading to the matter being brought before the Tribunal.

The Tribunal, in its judgment, considered the facts presented by the assessee, highlighting that the flat purchased was a bare shell requiring further expenditure to be habitable. The Tribunal, relying on previous decisions and the assessee's explanation, concluded that the expenditure was justifiable as it was aimed at making the residential unit habitable. Notably, the Tribunal also disallowed a portion of the expenditure amounting to &8377; 23,28,562, which was spent on luxury goods and not related to making the property habitable.

Moreover, the Tribunal referred to the decision of the Division Bench of Punjab and Haryana High Court in a similar case and a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in a previous judgment, both of which upheld the allowance of additional expenditure incurred by the assessee to make the residential unit habitable. The Tribunal, after assessing the facts and considering the purpose of the expenditure, dismissed the Revenue's appeal, emphasizing that no question of law arose in the matter.

In conclusion, the Tribunal's decision was based on factual assessments and accepted the assessee's claim that the expenditure was necessary to make the unit habitable. The judgment highlighted the importance of considering the purpose and nature of the expenditure in determining its eligibility for deduction under Section 54 of the Income Tax Act, ultimately leading to the dismissal of the Revenue's appeal.