Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the deduction under section 33(1)(n) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 was admissible where part of the house property was kept ready for personal residential use and was not let out after a specified date.
Analysis: The expression "house" was construed in its ordinary and contextual sense, and the requirement of use for residential purposes was held to call for a pragmatic and reasonable interpretation rather than a pedantic one. The Court relied on the analogous language of section 5(1)(iv) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 and held that actual physical residence throughout the year was not essential. What mattered was whether the property was kept ready for residential use and, in fact, used for residence, and not diverted to rent or commercial use. On the facts, the house was found to have been kept in readiness for use and not let out after the relevant date.
Conclusion: The disallowance of the deduction could not be sustained, and the question was answered against the Revenue and in favour of the accountable person.
Ratio Decidendi: For residential property exemptions under the estate duty and analogous tax provisions, "use for residential purposes" is to be applied pragmatically, and a house kept ready for personal residential use, even if not continuously occupied, satisfies the statutory requirement unless it is let out or put to commercial use.