Capital Gain exemption U/s. 54
This query is : Resolved
22 February 2011
The Sale proceeds arising from sale of a Residential house is invested in a new residential house is exempted.
My query is whether it is allowed for only one house or any number of residential house.
My query is whether it is allowed for only one house or any number of residential house.
22 February 2011
More than one house can be purchased.
Guest
Guest
(Expert)
22 February 2011
In my opinion, one one house.
22 February 2011
In the case of K.C.Kaushik vs. ITO reported in (1990) 185 ITR 499, Mumbai High Court said, where more than one house is purchased,then the assessee can claim relief in respect of only one house provided other conditions of section 54 are satisfied.
Guest
Guest
(Expert)
23 February 2011
In the provisions also, word singular word 'a house' is used.
23 February 2011
I have relied upon the following case laws while framing my answer.
D. Anand Basappa V ITO[2004] 91 ITD 53 (Bang.)
*
Prem Prakash BhutaniV CIT[2007]110 ITJ (Delhi)
*
CIT v.D. Ananda Basappa [2009] 180 Taxman (Kar.)
It has been decided in these cases that to claim deduction U/s 54, there is no bar on acquiring more than one residential house out of the proceeds of one residential house.
D. Anand Basappa V ITO[2004] 91 ITD 53 (Bang.)
*
Prem Prakash BhutaniV CIT[2007]110 ITJ (Delhi)
*
CIT v.D. Ananda Basappa [2009] 180 Taxman (Kar.)
It has been decided in these cases that to claim deduction U/s 54, there is no bar on acquiring more than one residential house out of the proceeds of one residential house.
26 February 2011
Bafna Ji
P & H high court distinguished D.Ananda Basappa's case in Pawan Arya Vs. CIT (2011)237 CTR 210 by saying that as regards claim of exemption against acquisition of two houses under section 54, the same is not admissible in plain language of the statute.
P & H high court distinguished D.Ananda Basappa's case in Pawan Arya Vs. CIT (2011)237 CTR 210 by saying that as regards claim of exemption against acquisition of two houses under section 54, the same is not admissible in plain language of the statute.
You need to be the querist or approved CAclub expert to take part in this query .
Click here to login now
Click here to login now
Similar Resolved Queries
Unanswered Queries
- Supply through E-commerce Operators
- AMOUNT RECEIVED UNDER COMPULOSRY ACQUISITION OF AGRICULTURAL LAND
- Relief u/s Section 89
- Sales return eway bill
- Agriculture income or business income
- GST ON DAMAGED GOODS
- Tax liability on income of freelancer
- STCG FOR GOLD ETFs
- Taxation on LTCG for property sold after 24JUL2024
- GST Registration Horse racing
- Section 54F - Exemption on LTCG in 2026 for HP purchased in 2023
- STCG....................................................
- Sales amount in Gstr1
- CG after sale of flat
- E Commerce GSTR1 & 3B how to file
- GST Cancellation without jurisdiction
- Legal Opinion on Registrar's Refusal to Investigate a Society for Non-Renewal and Non-Compliance
- GST Refund_RFD-01
- Form10BD was uploaded successfully without any Error but after 24 hours, Form10BE are not available
- Annexure B utility for GST Refund
Trending Online Classes
-
DT & Audit (Exam Oriented Fastrack Batch) - For May 26 Exams and onwards Full English
CA Bhanwar Borana & CA Shubham Keswani
CAclubindia
