Assessee gets LTCG exemption under Section 54F for two adjacent flats converted into single dwelling unit

The ITAT Mumbai allowed the assessee's appeal for LTCG exemption u/s 54F. The assessee purchased two adjacent flats and converted them into a single dwelling unit through a revised plan approved by MHADA. Despite the revenue's argument that two separate purchase agreements were executed, the tribunal held that since the flats were joined together and used as one residential unit with one kitchen and necessary structures, the exemption could not be denied. The tribunal relied on precedents establishing that when two units are closely connected and constitute a single residential unit, exemption u/s 54F remains available, distinguishing cases where units are distantly situated.

---

---

Issues Involved:

1. Incorrect application of facts and interpretation of law by CIT(A).
2. Disallowance of exemption claimed under Section 54F of the Income-tax Act.
3. Tax implications of conversion of a company into a Limited Liability Partnership (LLP).
4. Levy of interest under Sections 234A and 234B of the Act.
5. Initiation of penalty proceedings under Section 270A of the Act.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Incorrect Application of Facts and Interpretation of Law by CIT(A):

The assessee contended that the CIT(A) erred by relying on an incorrect application of facts and misinterpretation of the law. The CIT(A) directed the Assessing Officer (AO) to verify additional evidence and grant relief instead of granting full relief directly. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) has co-terminus powers and is fully equipped to verify additional documents. Therefore, the Tribunal did not find any force in the argument against the CIT(A) considering the revised plan issued by MHADA.

2. Disallowance of Exemption Claimed Under Section 54F:

The primary issue was whether the assessee was eligible for exemption under Section 54F for purchasing two adjacent flats intended to be used as a single residential unit. The AO disallowed the exemption, arguing that the purchase of two flats violated the condition of acquiring one residential house. However, the assessee submitted a revised plan approved by MHADA, showing the two flats as a single unit. The Tribunal relied on precedents from the Bombay High Court and Karnataka High Court, which held that exemption under Section 54F is available if two units are treated as one residential house. The Tribunal concluded that the assessee's intention was to use the flats as a single unit, and the revised plan supported this. Therefore, the Tribunal directed the AO to grant the full deduction under Section 54F.

3. Tax Implications of Conversion of Company into LLP:

The assessee argued that the conversion of a company into an LLP is not a taxable transfer under the Act, and thus, no capital gains should accrue. Since the Tribunal allowed the deduction under Section 54F, the issue of conversion became academic and was not adjudicated.

4. Levy of Interest Under Sections 234A and 234B:

These grounds were deemed consequential in nature. As the Tribunal allowed the deduction under Section 54F, the issues related to the levy of interest under Sections 234A and 234B did not require separate adjudication.

5. Initiation of Penalty Proceedings Under Section 270A:

The assessee challenged the initiation of penalty proceedings under Section 270A. However, as the Tribunal allowed the primary deduction claim, the penalty proceedings were not addressed separately.

Conclusion:

The Tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the assessee, granting the full exemption under Section 54F, and dismissed the appeal filed by the revenue. The Tribunal's decision was based on the interpretation of the legislative intent behind Section 54F and the factual evidence presented, including the revised plan approved by MHADA. The order was pronounced in the open court on 14/10/2024.

---