9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 1651X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... terpretation of the word a residential house to the effect that it may include more than one residential houses. It also considered the impact of the amendment by Finance (No. 2) Act of 2014 with effect from 1.04.2015 which could operate only prospectively from Assessment Year 2015-16. The present case before us is prior to that. Further the Hon ble High Court has also considered the decision cited by the learned Assessing Officer in para No. 13 of that order. In view of this we hold that assessee is also entitled to deduction under Section 54 of the Act in both the house properties even though they are geographically distantly located in the same city. Further the learned CIT (Appeals) has also failed to appreciate that amendment with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ellant in second house property is bad in law. 2. Brief fact shows that assessee filed return of income on 31.07.2013 of Rs.13,10,460/-. Assessee has derived income from house property, capital gain and income from other sources. She has declared capital gain on sale of flat at Mumbai of Rs.4,57,93,605/- and has also claimed a deduction of Rs.4,74,30,609/- under Section 54 of the Act. Thus, the consequent capital gain was Rs.NIL. The assessee was asked to justify claim under section 54 of the Act. Assessing Officer noted that assessee has sold 4 flats at Ashok Tower, Mumbai‟, in joint ownership with her husband Mr. Ajay Khanna on 09.04.2012. The assessee has purchased two house properties at Gurgaon and claimed deduction under Se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... icer. Therefore, assessee is aggrieved and in appeal. 3. The learned Authorized Representative vehemently submitted that assessee must get the deduction with respect to both the properties. The learned Departmental Representative vehemently relied upon the decision of Hon ble Madras High Court in Tilokchand Sons Vs. ITO (2019) 105 taxmann.com 151 (Madras). 3.1 The learned Departmental Representative vehemently relied upon the decision of lower authorities. 4. We have carefully considered the rival contentions and found that Hon ble Madras High Court in Tilokchand Sons Vs. ITO (supra) has held that the dislocation of newly purchased residential houses will not alter the position for interpretation of the word a residential hous ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
