ITO, CHENNAI vs. PREETHI JEYAKUMAR, CHENNAI
In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that a residential house can include multiple flats/units and that the amendment to Section 54F, which restricted this deduction for multiple units, had prospective operation and was not applicable to the assessment year in question. Therefore, the CIT(Appeals)'s order was confirmed.
What were the facts?
The Revenue appealed against the CIT(Appeals)'s order allowing deduction under Section 54F. The assessee had claimed this deduction on the sale of a long-term capital asset, which was disallowed by the Assessing Officer due to the assessee owning multiple residential units.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee is eligible for deduction under Section 54F when owning multiple residential units, and the applicability of the amendment to Section 54F.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN & SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH
Heard together (2 matters)
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:
This appeal of the Revenue is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -5, Chennai, dated 15.09.2016 and pertains to assessment year 2012-13. The assessee has filed the cross-objection against the very same order.
Therefore, we heard both the appeal and the cross-objection together and disposing of the same by this common order.
The only issue arises for consideration in the Revenue’s appeal is deduction claimed by the assessee under Section 54F of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act').
We have heard both, Shri R. Durai Pandian, the Ld. Departmental Representative and Shri T.N. Seetharaman, the Ld.counsel for the assessee. The Assessing Officer disallowed the claim of the assessee under Section 54F of the Act on the ground that the assessee has multi residential units, therefore, not eligible for deduction under Section 54F of the Act. However, the CIT(Appeals) placing reliance on the judgment of Madras High Court in CIT v. Smt. V.R. Karpagam (2014) 272 CTR 184, found that the residential house would include multiple flats/residential units and amendment made to Section 54F of the Act would be prospective operation, therefore, it is not applicable to the earlier assessment years. In view of this judgment of Madras High Court, this Tribunal do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the lower authority and accordingly the same is confirmed.
Since this Tribunal confirms the order of the CIT(Appeals) with regard to exemption claimed by the assessee under Section 54F of the Act, the cross-objection filed by the assessee becomes infructuous and academic in nature. Accordingly, the cross- objection of the assessee stands dismissed.
In the result, both the appeal of the Revenue and the cross- objection of the assessee are dismissed.
Order pronounced on 23rd March, 2017 at Chennai.
More judgments on Section 54F
- Shalin Jayantbhai Desai, Vadodara vs ACIT, Circle-4(2), Vadodara Present…ITA 2569/AHD/2026[2010-11]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2010-11
- Ramakrishna Reddy Makireddy, Hyderabad vs ACIT, Circle-5(1), HyderabadITA 70/HYD/2026[2007-08]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2007-08
- Nand Kishore Agarwal, Hyderabad vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(3), Hyderabad.ITA 2101/HYD/2025[2015-16]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Jaipal Jona, Hyderabad vs DCIT, Central Circle-3(3), HyderabadITA 1889/HYD/2025[2023-24]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2023-24
- Renu Arun Talwar, Mumbai vs Circle 17(1), MumbaiITA 204/MUM/2026[2012-13]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2012-13
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Priya, Townhall Road, Cuttack vs. Superintendent Cuttack- I Range, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- Dwaraka Jewellers, Bhubaneswar vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S N D Waddar And Co vs. Sri Gaurav GuptaKarnataka · 30 Oct 2026
- Kanwar Enterprises Private Limited vs. The Joint Commissioner - State TaxTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S. Bangi Mines And Minerals vs. The State Of TelanganaTelangana · 30 Oct 2026