ITO, CHENNAI vs. SHRI A.P. MADANMOHAN, CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2808/CHNY/2016Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 April 2017AY 2007-084 pages

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

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessees are eligible for exemption under Section 54F, even if they received multiple flats, following the Madras High Court judgment in CIT v. Smt. V.R. Karpagam. This was a second round of litigation where the Tribunal confirmed its earlier decision.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(Appeals) order allowing deduction under Section 54F to the assessees. The assessees claimed exemption for residential units received in lieu of land transferred for joint development.

What were the issues?

Whether assessees are eligible for deduction under Section 54F when they receive multiple residential units in lieu of land transferred for development.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 54F

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN & SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH

For Respondent: Shri P. Rajasekharan, CA
Hearing: 13.03.2017Pronounced: 07.04.2017

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No.2807/Mds/2016
ITA No.2808/Mds/2016

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

आदेश /O R D E R

PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

1.

These appeals of the Revenue are directed against the respective orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Chennai, dated 27.07.2016 and pertain to assessment year 2007- 08.

2.

The only issue arises for consideration in these appeals is deduction claimed by the assessees under Section 54F of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act').

3.

We have heard Shri A.V. Sreekanth, the Ld. Departmental Representative and Shri P. Rajasekharan, the Ld. representative for the assessees. The CIT(Appeals) allowed the claim of the assessees by placing reliance on the judgment of Madras High Court in CIT v. Smt. V.R. Karpagam in Tax Case (Appeal) No.301 of 2014. The CIT(Appeals) has also placed reliance in the assessees’ own case allowed by this Tribunal.

4.

This is second round of litigation before this Tribunal. In the first round of litigation, this Tribunal in & 1495/Mds/2013 dated 15.05.2015, found that in view of judgment of Madras High Court in V.R. Karpagam (supra), assessees are eligible for exemption even though multiple flats were allotted to them in lieu of cost of 60% of the land. This Tribunal has observed at para 12 on pages 12 and 13 as follows:-

“12. Now coming to the issue of exemption under Section 54F of the Act, the assessees entrusted the construction of the building to the builder in lieu of 60% of the landed area transferred to the builder. Therefore, the assessees, from the date on which the transfer was made by entering into agreement for joint development, are in the process of constructing the residential house. Therefore, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the assessees are entitled for exemption under Section 54F of the Act. Now the objection of the Department is that the assessees got multiple flats, almost eight flats each, in lieu of the land transferred to the builder. The question arises for consideration is when the assessees received eight flats/residential units from the builder in lieu of cost of the land transferred to the builder, whether the assessees are entitled for exemption under Section 54F of the Act? We have gone through the judgment of Madras High Court in V.R. Karpagam (supra). In this case, the assessee obtained five independent flats in a multi-storied construction and claimed exemption as independent unit under Section 54F of the Act. The Madras High Court, after referring to the amendment made with effect from 1.4.2015, found that the assessee is eligible for exemption under Section 54F of the Act. In view of the judgment of the Madras High Court, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the assessees are eligible for exemption even though multiple flats were allotted to them in lieu of cost of 60% of the land allotted to the builder.”

5.

In view of the above, this Tribunal do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the lower authority and accordingly the same is confirmed.

6.

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed.

Order pronounced on 7th April, 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 →