Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Dr. Sudhir Naik (HUF) Vs. Income Tax Officer (ITAT Hyderabad)
Appeal Number : ITA No. 1463/Hyd/16 & 1467/Hyd/16
Date of Judgement/Order : 31/01/2018
Related Assessment Year : 2003-04
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Dr. Sudhir Naik (HUF) Vs. ITO (ITAT Hyderabad)

Another contention is about claim of 54F/54. It was the contention that assessee has sold all the flats allotted to him and therefore, at the time of investing in the new house, he has no other house except this house. As seen from the agreements and the principles of law involved, all the apartments received in the development agreement would become one house technically, even though they are of independent units. But, when the claim is made, it was the contention of assessee that all those flats were sold. Therefore, a

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

One Comment

  1. vswami says:

    OFFHAND

    “….As seen from the agreements and the principles of law involved, all the apartments received in the development agreement WOULD BECOME ONE HOUSE TECHNICALLY , EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE OF INDEPENDENT UNITS even though they are of independent units. But, when the claim is made, it was the contention of assessee that all those flats were sold. Therefore, assessee does not own any other house, except the house in which he has invested…..” -?!
    (FONT supplied to focus on the obvious forbearing contradiction in terms)

    < Calls for an independent in-depth study, in all its ramifications; may worth doing so in the light of discussion in, – (2014) 226 TAXMAN pg 143-151 !

    NOTE: Prima facie, the assessee's contention has to be decided,- there being no fresh facts required, having regard to the applicable provisions of the IT Act; to be conjointly read with the state law on 'Flats'. The doubt is, – instead of remanding, could not the ITAT decided the issue, within its vested powers ?!

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Ads Free tax News and Updates
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
March 2025
M T W T F S S
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31