TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Quantum appeal granted for house property cost under section 54</h1> <h3>Shrinivas R Desai Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income- tax (OSD), Circle-10</h3> Shrinivas R Desai Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income- tax (OSD), Circle-10 - TMI Issues:1. Justification of denial of exemption under section 54 for the cost of improvement in a new house property.Analysis:The judgment pertains to a recalled matter where the quantum appeal was directed against an order passed by the CIT(A) regarding the assessment under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2007-08. The main issue was whether the denial of exemption under section 54 for the cost of improvement in the new house property amounting to Rs 15,48,773 was justified. The assessee had sold a property and purchased another one, claiming to have spent on its improvement. The Assessing Officer disallowed the deduction for the cost of improvement, stating it should be allowed in the hands of the transferor. The CIT(A) upheld this decision, leading to the appeal before the ITAT.The authorities below emphasized that since the original house was sold in August 2006, it was assumed that the new house was habitable by September 2007, thereby rejecting the claim for the cost of improvement. However, it was revealed that the assessee had lived in a leased residential unit during this period, indicating that the new house might not have been habitable immediately after purchase. The ITAT highlighted that moving into a new property does not necessarily mean all construction work is complete. Referring to Section 54(1) of the Act, the ITAT concluded that any capital expenditure incurred by the assessee to make the property habitable should be included in the cost of the new asset for the exemption. The ITAT emphasized that even if a property was purchased as a ready-made unit, additional bonafide construction expenditure would qualify as a part of the investment under Section 54.The ITAT, therefore, set aside the previous decisions and restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. The Assessing Officer was directed to conduct factual verifications and provide a speaking order after giving the assessee another opportunity for a hearing. The quantum appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, modifying the previous order. The judgment was pronounced in an open court on June 28, 2013.
TaxTMI 