Case Law Details
Brief about the case:
In the case of CIT vs Kapil Nagpal, it was held by the Delhi High Court that purchase of an agricultural land used for agricultural purposes did not violate 54F conditions. Further the exclusive ownership of the residential house on the date of transfer is required to prove violation of Section 54F.
In the given case the assessee claimed exemption u/s 54F after transfer of long term shares on 08.11.2007.On the date of transfer the Assessee had one house at Village Fatehpur Beri which he had purchased on 22.07.2006 and only 15% share in the house property at Gadaipur. It was clear that the Assessee had purchased 85% share in Gadaipur house on 10.04.2007, thus becoming the full owner of the said house. It is accordingly claimed on the sale of share, i.e., 08.11.2006 the Assessee did not have the full ownership of the residential house at Gadaipur and was only a co-owner along with his father. The ownership of 15% in the Gadaipur house would not constitute the exclusive ownership of a residential house under Section 54F of the Act.
Facts of the case:
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Good decision if an assessee is co-owner in property then it will not consider as holding residential house (ie one house as on date of house) for claiming 54F exemption