G,VENKATESALU,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 658/CHNY/2017Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 October 2017AY 2005-20064 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee's property, though sub-divided floor-wise into three units, constituted a single residential building and not multiple independent houses. Therefore, the assessee was eligible for the benefit of Section 54F.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed exemption under Section 54F for capital gains. The Assessing Officer disallowed this exemption, stating the assessee owned multiple residential properties. The CIT(A) upheld this decision.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee is entitled to the benefit of Section 54F when the residential property is sub-divided into multiple units within a single building.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 54F,Section 143(3),Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘SMC’ ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

Hearing: 12.10.2017

आदेश / O R D E R

1.

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Chennai dated 22.08.2016 in for the assessment year 2005-06 passed u/s.250(6) r.w.s.143(3) & 147 of the Act.

2.

The appeal was filed by the assessee with a delay of 143 days. The Ld. AR submitted that the delay had occurred since the assessee was not well due to old age. Therefore the Ld. AR pleaded that the delay may be condoned. The Ld. DR strongly objected to the submission of the Ld. AR. After hearing both sides, I’m of the considered view that the delay of 143 days in filing the appeal should be condoned because of the genuine reason of illness during old age. Therefore I hereby condone the delay and proceed to hear the appeal on merits.

3.

The assessee has raised several grounds in his appeal, however the crux of the issue is that the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in not granting the benefit of Section 54F of the Act while computing the capital gain of the assessee.

4.

The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual, filed his return of income for the assessment year 2005-06 on 31.03.2006 admitting total income of Rs.2,62,417/-.

Initially the return was processed U/s.143(1) of the Act and subsequently the case was reopened U/s.147 with the approval of the Commissioner of Income Tax-X, Chennai because the assessee had claimed exemption U/s.54F though he had multiple residential property and finally assessment order was passed U/s.143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act on 07.12.2011, wherein the Ld.AO disallowed the claim of deduction U/s.54F of the Act because the assessee owned more than one residential house property as per his statement of income. On appeal the Ld.CIT(A) confirmed the order of the Ld.AO. The finding of the Ld.CIT(A) for arriving at his conclusion is that the assessee owned three residential unit in his residential plot No.5, Chengalvarayar Street, Shenoy Nagar consisting of a residential unit in the ground floor, first floor & second floor.

5.

At the outset, I find that the assessee had constructed one building in plot No.5, Chengalvarayar Street, Shenoy Nagar consisting of ground floor, first floor & second floor. The entire building is one residential building sub-divided into three parts floor-wise, therefore even though it is used for residential purpose as three units, it cannot be considered as three independent houses. The entire building has to be treated as one residential unit. Thus in the case of the assessee, he does not own more than one residential unit, hence the assessee is entitled for benefit of Section 54F of the Act. For the above said reasons I hereby direct the Ld.AO to grant the benefit of Section 54F to the assessee.

6.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.

Order pronounced on 12th October, 2017 at Chennai.

More judgments on Section 54F

All 2,628 judgments and leading authorities on Section 54F →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →