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>HUF Can Reinvest Capital Gains in Two Flats Without Losing Exemption Under Section 54(1) of Income Tax Act</h1> <h3>COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX AND ANOTHER Versus D. ANANDA BASAPPA</h3> HC held that when an HUF sold its residential house, reinvestment of capital gains in more than one residential dwelling does not defeat exemption under ... Exemption u/s 54 - exemption for capital gains on the sale of residential property - HELD THAT:- When a Hindu undivided family's residential house is sold, the capital gain should be invested for the purchase of only one residential house is an incorrect proposition. After all, the Hindu undivided family property is held by the members as joint tenants. The members keeping in view the future needs in event of separation, purchase more than one residential building, it cannot be said that the benefit of exemption is to be denied under section 54(1) of the Income-tax Act. The fact that at the time when the inspector inspected the premises, the flats were occupied by two different tenants is not the ground to hold that the apartment is not a one residential unit. The fact that the assessee could have purchased both the flats in one single sale deed or could have narrated the purchase of two premises as one unit in the sale deed is not the ground to hold that the assessee had no intention to purchase the two flats as one unit. Thus, the substantial questions of law are answered in favour of the assessee. The appeal is dismissed. Issues:1. Interpretation of section 54 of the Income-tax Act regarding exemption for capital gains on the sale of residential property.2. Whether the purchase of two adjacent residential flats by a Hindu undivided family can be considered as one residential unit for exemption under section 54.3. Application of the proviso to section 54F of the Income-tax Act in claiming exemption for more than one dwelling unit.Analysis:The judgment dealt with the interpretation of section 54 of the Income-tax Act concerning the exemption for capital gains on the sale of a residential property. The respondent, a Hindu undivided family, sold a residential house and purchased two adjacent residential flats from the same developer. The assessing authority initially granted exemption for one flat only, citing separate enjoyment by different tenants. However, the Tribunal overturned this decision, considering the two flats as one residential unit and allowing full exemption to the assessee.The substantial questions of law framed for consideration included whether the assessee could invest sale proceeds in two residential flats and claim deductions under section 54, and whether the proviso to section 54F allowed relief for more than one dwelling unit. The judgment analyzed the provisions of section 54(1) of the Income-tax Act, emphasizing that the singular term 'a' residential house could include the plural, allowing investment in multiple residential units for exemption.The court rejected the Revenue's contention that 'a' residential house should be strictly interpreted as singular, highlighting that a non-residential building could be sold to invest in a residential building for exemption. It was noted that in the case of a Hindu undivided family, owning multiple residential properties did not disqualify them from claiming exemption under section 54(1) of the Act, considering the joint ownership structure.The judgment emphasized the physical connection between the two flats purchased by the assessee, with the builder confirming modifications to unite them into one residential unit. The presence of separate tenants at the time of inspection was deemed irrelevant to the unit's status. The court held that the intention to purchase the two flats as a single unit was evident, dismissing the appeal and ruling in favor of the assessee based on the facts presented.In conclusion, the court's decision favored the assessee, allowing the purchase of two adjacent residential flats by a Hindu undivided family to be considered as one residential unit for exemption under section 54 of the Income-tax Act. The judgment clarified the interpretation of relevant provisions and upheld the assessee's entitlement to full exemption based on the circumstances and intentions of the property purchase.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
