9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (5) TMI 64X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d representative for the assessee submitted that prior to the amendment to section 54F effective from April 1, 2015 the assessee was entitled for the benefits of more than one flat as discussed above. It is pertinent to mention here that the hon'ble Madras High Court, in the case of CIT v. Smt. V. R. Karpagam [2014 (8) TMI 899 - MADRAS HIGH COURT ] has clearly held that the amendment to provision of section 54F is effective from April 1, 2015, which makes it clear that benefit of section 54F will be applicable to one residential house in India. Prior to the amendment it was clear that a residential house would include multiple residential units. Assessing Officer is directed to allow the claim of the assessee with respect to two flats p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of plural sense that the building or flat should be of a residential in nature. (4) The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in not considering the judgment of the Karnataka High Court of CIT v. D. Ananda Basappa [2009] 309 ITR 329 (Karn) ; [2009] 223 CTR (Karn) 186 and relying upon judgment of lower authority, i.e., the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai of Sushila Jhaveri. (5) The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) further erred in this connection in making the foregoing addition in contravention of the principles of natural justice. (6) The learned Assessing Officer has erred in inflicting interest under section 234B of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 3. The brief facts of the case are that during th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g Officer in allowing deduction in respect of only one flat is justified and same was confirmed. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) observed that the assessee has sold the tenancy right in flat at Room No. 1, Ground Floor, Ganga Niwas, Vile Parle(e), Mumbai- 57 for a consideration of ₹ 65,00,000 and purchased two flats, one at ground floor of Gangotri Prathana CJS Ltd., Prathana Samaj Road, Vile Parle (E), Mumbai-57 whereas the other flat was purchased at 3rd Floor, Hem Prabha CHS Ltd. junction of Chittaranjan Road, and Tilak Maindir Road, Vile Parle (E), Mumbai-57. According to the Revenue the assessee has purchased two flats at different locations in different societies. Accordingly, by no stretch of imagination they can be co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessment year 2007-08. The Assessing Officer granted the benefit of exemption in respect of one flat and that too with regard to the floor space vis-a-vis 2413.36 sq. ft. The Commissioner (Appeals) held that the claim of the assessee under section 54F for all the five flats could not be admitted but the assessee was entitled to the benefit of section 54F in respect of single flat with the largest area of 4814.36 sq. ft. In her appeal the Tribunal held that the assessee was eligible for exemption under section 54F on all five flats received by her in lieu of the land she had parted with. The hon'ble Madras High Court dismissed the appeal of the Revenue observing that amendments to section 54F effective from April 1, 2015, makes it clear ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
