Anish (CA Practice ) (15 Points)
28 January 2012An old man owned a house property in which he was residing along with his two childern. Now he wants to sell off his property and wants to buy two houses for his two children. Since he is an old person, banks are not willing to give loan to this gentlemen. He is not buying house in his own name but in his sons' name. He will use both the houses for his residence. Whether exemption is available under section 54 as he is buying house but not in his own name but in the name of their sons?
Bhushan Ramani
(Chartered Accountant)
(105 Points)
Replied 28 January 2012
No.. he is not entitled for expemtion under sec 54 of CG... in order avail the expemtion , he should be the joint holder of the properties.. however he can buy the property in her spouse name and avail the expemtion.. but not his son's name..
Regards,
Bhushan Ramani
CA. ANKUR JAIN
(CA.....)
(2800 Points)
Replied 28 January 2012
| Originally posted by : Bhushan Ramani | ||
 |
No.. he is not entitled for expemtion under sec 54 of CG... in order avail the expemtion , he should be the joint holder of the properties.. however he can buy the property in her spouse name and avail the expemtion.. but not his son's name.. Regards, Bhushan Ramani |
 |
agreeeed
suchit shah
(Dy. Manager(Finance & Accounts))
(208 Points)
Replied 28 January 2012
According to sec 54 if a person sell 1 house and buys 2 then he can claim exemption for both the houses and vis-a-vis... but he has to be the owner of the property.. . . i am not so sure about the joint ownership with spouse.... if it has been written any where then pls let me know......
Z
( )
(2965 Points)
Replied 29 January 2012
Exemption u/s 54 will be allowed as nowehere in the sec it says that the property should be in the owners name
For the purpose of attracting the provisions of section 54, it is not necessary that the assessee should become the owner of the property purchased. The word ‘purchase’ occurring in section 54(1) has to be given its common meaning, viz., buy for a price or equivalent of price by payment in kind or adjustment towards a debt or for other monetary consideration. Therefore, for the purpose of applicability of section 54, registration of the document is not imperative Balraj v. CIT [2002]
.
More than one residential house property can also be purchased and exemption can be availed for both of them
it depends on the facts of the case
If all those residential units can be modified to unite and make it a single residential house property then assesse can claim ecemption having regards to decision made in (CIT v D. Ananda Basappa ( 2009 ) 20 DTR 266 (Kar)).
Bhushan Ramani
(Chartered Accountant)
(105 Points)
Replied 30 January 2012
i m sure that registration is not imperative ... but i dn't agree with ownership point .. Although there might be case law on the same.. But practically the A.O diallow the exemption , if taken
CA Amit Gupta
(Risk & Liquidity Manager)
(31 Points)
Replied 30 January 2012
Rejitha Rajappan
(Chartered Accountant)
(62 Points)
Replied 09 February 2012
In this case house property has sold on October 1, 2010 and the consideration has reinvested in new house property on April 1, 2011 . So the exemption u/s 54 can de claimed. If the full amount of consideation has re - invested then you will get full deduction. Hope the said house propert is a Long Term Capital Asset. Interest received by lending money is taxable under the head Income from other source 
Landmark Judgments: Important Provisions of the EPF & ESI Act interpreted by the Honorable Supreme Court of India
CAclubindia
