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
- Is this income indian or foreign income?
- 15ca /15cb whose income tax login? remitter or nri seller's login?
- ITC temporary reversal and reclaim
- TDS U/S. 194NF
- GST on export of services and Input Credit
- Regarding Documentation & Compliances for Opening of Unit of Pvt Ltd.
- RCM applicability on Rent Paid by Registered Person to Unregistered Landlord for Residental Building
- Inventory of finished goods
- Applicable TDS rate for sale of property in Nov 2024
- Import license renewal
- LAST YEAR 2022-23 ITC IN NEXT YEAR 2023-24 REPORITNG IN GSTR-9
- MIS MATCH OF INVOICE NUMBER
- IGST Credit-Show cause notice issued-confusion
- Issue of gst e invoice
- How to adjusted advances given or receipt
- Foreign vendor without PAN unable to to register due to non receipt of OTP on foreign number ?
- 133(6) DIN INVALID format error - ->WHERE TO REPLY 133(6) notice?
- Query for dubts
- Regarding einvoice taken on nil rated sales
- Strategical investment in Public listed company
Trending Online Classes
CAclubindia
