Daulat Singh Haldea Vs ITO (ITAT Jaipur)
Joint purchase with son doesn’t dilute s.54F relief; assessee entitled to 100% exemption despite name in sale deed
Jaipur Tribunal partly allowed Assessee’s appeal. Tribunal upheld disallowance of ₹5 lakh transfer expenses relating to sale of immovable property for want of any supporting evidence, noting that Assessee failed to substantiate payment of brokerage before AO, CIT(A) or even Tribunal. However, Tribunal set aside order of CIT(A) restricting exemption u/s 54F to 50% and held that Assessee was entitled to 100% exemption u/s 54F, despite purchase of new residential property being in joint names of Assessee & his son. Tribunal observed that entire consideration was paid by Assessee from his own funds, share of son was not specified in sale deed, son had no independent source of income and had not claimed any exemption. Mere inclusion of son’s name for convenience did not disentitle Assessee from full exemption. Accordingly, AO was directed to allow full 54F exemption, while disallowance of transfer expenses was confirmed
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT JAIPUR
Assessee-appellant is feeling dissatisfied with the order dated 22.09.2025, passed by Learned CIT(A), NFAC, relating to the assessment year 2012-13, as thereby his appeal challenging the assessment order dated 11.12.2019 has been allowed only partly.
