Case Law Details
Case Name : Vittal Krishna Conjeevaram Vs Income Tax Officer (ITAT Hyderabad)
Related Assessment Year : 2009- 2010
Courts :
All ITAT ITAT Hyderabad
Become a Premium member to Download.
If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored
CA Sandeep Kanoi
Assessee, owner of a residential property, entered into a development agreement for construction of flats with a developer. Under agreement, assessee received 7 flats towards his share. He claimed exemption u/s 54F on the entire amount of capital gain. AO held that assessee is entitled to exemption u/s 54F but only in respect of 1 flat out of 7 flats. It was held that assessee is entitled to exemption u/s 54F in respect of all the 7 flats in light of consistent view of different High Courts hold
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Sponsored
Kindly Refer to
Privacy Policy &
Complete Terms of Use and Disclaimer.
What if assessee construct, concurrently, or get constructed more than one residential buildings in the same locality but not connected by outer walls?
Amendment in sections which creates ambiguities may be taken keeping in view of judicial decisions which interpret the law on the basis of public policies which are behind every provisions of law. In case residential units purchased out of the capital gains and are placed at different locations because members of the family are based at different locations due to different reasons such units also be treated as residential unit of the family irrespective of the fact that they are at different locations because these units belong to the same family and are purchased out of the capital gain in which every member of the family has his or her share and the residential unit represents their share in the capital gains. Thanking all.