Case Law Details
Shri Ramphal Hooda Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi)
Whether the exemption under Section 54F is extendable to the assessee for the total consideration paid by him, for the purchase of the new asset (the residential property) in the joint name or the exemption would be entitled to the extent of the share of the assessee in the said purchased property. – Held that – When whole of the purchase consideration has been paid by the assessee and not even a single penny has been contributed by the wife in the purchase of the house, the assessee is entitled to full exemption. In CIT v. Podar Cement (P.) Ltd. (1997 (5) TMI 2 – SUPREME Court), the Supreme Court has also accepted the theory of constructive ownership. Moreover, Section 54F mandates that the house should be purchased by the assessee and it does not stipulate that the house should be purchased in the name of the assessee only.
Since the entire sale amount of long term capital gain have been invested in purchase of other property in the name of wife of assessee, assessee would be entitled for exemption on account of long term capital gains.
FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGEMENT
This appeal by Assessee has been directed against the Order of the Ld. CIT(A)-28, New Delhi, Dated 06.09.2019, for the A.Y. 2014-2015, denying exemption under section 54/54F of the I.T. Act, 1961, by making addition of Rs. 1,42,23,431/- under the Head “Long Term Capital Gains.”
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
