2013 (11) TMI 514 - AT - Income Tax

Tax Tribunal allows deduction for post-sale residential investment under Section 54F

Smt. Nimmagadda Sridevi Versus DCIT Circle-3(3) Hyderabad

Smt. Nimmagadda Sridevi Versus DCIT Circle-3(3) Hyderabad - TMI Issues Involved:1. Non-granting of deduction under Section 54F of the Income-tax Act, 1961.2. Determination of the eligibility and timing of the investment in the new residential house for claiming the deduction under Section 54F.Detailed Analysis:1. Non-granting of Deduction under Section 54F:The primary issue is whether the assessee is entitled to a deduction under Section 54F of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The assessee claimed a deduction of Rs. 5,30,04,081 for the investment in a new house, but the Assessing Officer denied this, stating that the construction was substantially completed before the sale of the original asset, thus not fulfilling the conditions of Section 54F.2. Determination of Eligibility and Timing of Investment:The assessee argued that the construction of the new house was ongoing and not completed by March 2007. The construction continued until October 2009, and the house was occupied in November 2009. The assessee provided balance sheets and municipal tax assessments to support this claim. The assessee contended that the investment made after the sale of the original asset should be eligible for deduction under Section 54F.The Departmental Representative (DR) countered that substantial construction was completed before the sale of the original asset, and thus, the assessee already had a residential house at the time of sale. The DR cited the judgment in CIT v. Pradeep Kumar, emphasizing that mere additions or modifications to an existing house do not qualify as constructing a new residential house under Section 54F.Tribunal's Findings:The Tribunal reviewed the material and arguments presented. It noted that the construction was ongoing at the time of the sale of the original asset and continued until October 2009. The Tribunal referred to the Karnataka High Court's decision in CIT v. J.R. Subrahmanya Bhatt, which held that the commencement of construction before the sale but completion within the stipulated period qualifies for deduction under Section 54F.The Tribunal emphasized that Section 54F should be construed liberally to promote investment in residential houses, as supported by the Supreme Court's observation in Bajaj Tempo Ltd. and the Board's Circular No. 471. The Tribunal concluded that investment in a residential house includes making the house habitable, and thus, investments made after the sale of the original asset should be considered for deduction under Section 54F.Conclusion:The Tribunal directed the assessee to furnish details of the investment made in the construction of the new residential building after the sale of the existing property. The Assessing Officer was instructed to quantify the deduction under Section 54F based on the investment made after the sale and within the stipulated period. The appeal was partly allowed for statistical purposes.Order Pronounced:The order was pronounced in the open court on 22nd February 2013.