Tribunal allows deduction under Section 54F for land and residential unit

The Tribunal dismissed the claim regarding the disallowance of the cost of improvement due to insufficient evidence. However, it allowed the deduction under Section 54F for the entire land and constructed residential unit, directing the AO to grant the deduction. The appeal was partly allowed in favor of the assessee.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Disallowance of cost of improvement.
2. Disallowance of deduction claimed under Section 54F.
3. Whether the constructed residential house qualifies for the deduction under Section 54F.

Summary:

Issue 1: Disallowance of Cost of Improvement
The assessee contested the disallowance of Rs. 4 lakh as the cost of improvement on the property sold during FY 1996-97. The AO and CIT(A) disallowed the claim, citing unreliable documentary evidence. The CIT(A) noted that the bills and vouchers submitted lacked authenticity, including issues like sequential bill numbers despite different dates, absence of sales tax registration or PAN, and non-existent contact numbers at the time. The Tribunal upheld the disallowance, agreeing with the AO and CIT(A) that the evidence provided was insufficient to substantiate the claim.

Issue 2 and 3: Disallowance of Deduction under Section 54F
The assessee claimed a deduction under Section 54F for investing in a new residential house. The AO disallowed the claim, stating that the assessee only possessed a piece of land without any construction. The CIT(A) partially allowed the claim but restricted it to the constructed portion, not the entire land, and questioned the residential intent and the small size of the constructed portion relative to the land size.

The Tribunal reviewed the evidence, including site plans, valuation reports, and change of land use (CLU) certificates, which indicated the construction of a residential unit. The Tribunal referred to various ITAT decisions, concluding that the non-residential use of a residential house does not disqualify it from Section 54F benefits. It also stated that the size of the constructed portion should not limit the exemption to the land appurtenant. The Tribunal ruled that the assessee met all conditions for the deduction under Section 54F and directed the AO to allow the deduction for the entire land and constructed portion.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal dismissed the ground on the cost of improvement but allowed the grounds related to the Section 54F deduction, directing the AO to grant the deduction for the entire land and constructed residential unit. The appeal was partly allowed.

---