This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.
S. 54 Constructed house of members cannot be deemed to be of society
Case Law Details
- Case Name
- M/s Asha Pushp Vihar Sahkari Awas Samiti Limited, Vs (i)Additional Commissioner of Income Tax (ITAT Delhi)
- Appeal Number
- Only available for paid members
- Date of Judgement/Order
- Only available for paid members
- Courts
- ITAT Delhi
Upgrade to Basic or Premium to download.
Already Upgraded? Log in.
Issue- Coming to the last year i.e. AY 2004-05, there is an issue about long term capital gains received by the assessee on acquisition of land at Rs. 1,65,35,891/- from GDA. The assessee has claimed the gains to be exempt u/s 54F on the plea that houses constructed by members are deemed to be the houses constructed by the society and as the amount invested in construction exceeds any long term capital gains received, the same is exempt u/s 54.
Held – The assessee’s claim of exemption u/s 54 is devoid of merits as the concept of mutuality has not been extended to the assessee besides ...
One has all along come across any number of instances in which the FM and its coterie, in their wisdom , rather lack of it, mindlessly and with a vengeance, have been tinkering with the law (e.g income-tax and service tax) introducing the highly objectionable deeming concept. Now, in this reported case it is the assessee, in turn, who has chosen to follow the same route / the footsteps of, as that of its rulers.
The case is too mind- boggling and brain- stressing to offend offhand anyone’s normal understanding of the concept of ‘mutuality’. Proves so difficult for anyone having some tax knowledge and experience to understand much less appreciate the very issues raised and tackled.
Primarily, the advanced claim based on the so-called concept of ‘mutuality’ is prima facie an attempt in a cavalier fashion at twisting and tweaking violently the very concept itself; and goes against the grain of it as understood in legal parlance and accepted thus far. It is an outright meaningless exercise conceived of, and only fit to be ridiculed as a misadventure akin to a proverbial shot in the dark.
The earlier any such tomfoolery is effectively discouraged and curbed the better. Thereby save the Revenue from frittering away taxpayers’ monies in having been obliged to defending any such cases, where assesses try to raise and pursue points, which truly are ‘non-issues’ in every sense of the term.
Here is an unique opportunity for experts to , in a dispassionate manner, openly air their sincere views.