Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Indihaf Jamal Mohamed Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai)
Related Assessment Year : 2016-17
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.

Indihaf Jamal Mohamed Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai)

Registration Delay Not Fatal: Builder’s Delay Can’t Deny 54 Deduction- ITAT Says 54 Allowed If Payments Made in Time

Assessee, a retired Assistant Registrar, sold his residential house on 16.09.2015 for Rs.60 lakh & claimed deduction u/s 54 after reinvesting Rs.48,00,114 in a flat at “Lake Dugar”, Ambattur. AO denied the claim solely because the registration of the new flat occurred on 24.01.2019—beyond one year—stating that “transfer has not take

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

Author Bio

CA Vijayakumar Shetty qualified in 1994 and in practice since then. Founding partner of Shetty & Co. He is a graduate from St Aloysius College, Mangalore . View Full Profile

My Published Posts

Recorded Sales Cannot Be Taxed Again U/s 68; Additions Based Only on Third-Party Statement Deleted On-Money Addition for Flat Purchase Deleted; Builder’s General Statement Alone Not Enough Bogus Purchase Cases: Only Profit Element Taxable; 4% GP Addition Upheld Assessment on Amalgamated Company Held Void for Lack of Jurisdiction Penalty for Non-Compliance Deleted as Venial Breach Where Assessments Accepted Returned Income View More Published Posts

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

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.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

Ads Free tax News and Updates
Search Post by Date
January 2026
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031