Husband entitled to section 54F exemption despite property transactions in wife's name, adjacent flats treated as single property

ITAT Mumbai held that assessee was entitled to exemption u/s 54F despite property transactions being in wife's name. The tribunal ruled that dependent spouse's income could be included in husband's return under section 64(1), making him the beneficial owner. Regarding investment in two flats allegedly violating section 54F, the tribunal found both flats were adjacent units constituting a single property, not contravening the provision. The amendment requiring single flat investment was effective from 01/04/2015, not applicable to A.Y. 2014-15. Following precedents in Simran Bagga and D. Ananda Basappa cases, the tribunal allowed the exemption claim and deleted the addition. Appeal allowed.

---

---

Issues:
- Disallowance of exemption under section 54
- Application of provisions of section 64(1) of the Income-tax Act
- Eligibility for exemption under section 54F
- Contravention of section 54F relating to investment in two flats

Detailed Analysis:
The judgment involved an appeal against an order passed under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for Assessment Year 2014-15. The assessee contested the disallowance of exemption under section 54 and the application of section 64(1) of the Act. The assessee, a salaried individual in the merchant navy, purchased a flat in 1991 in his wife's name, sold it in 2013, and bought two new flats in his wife's name. The Assessing Officer rejected the claim under section 54F as the property was not held in the assessee's name. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) upheld the assessment order, leading to the appeal before the tribunal.

The assessee argued that the entire investment was made by him in his wife's name, justifying the claim under section 54F. The assessee relied on judicial precedents emphasizing the liberal interpretation of provisions like section 54F. The tribunal considered relevant case laws and provisions to determine the eligibility for exemption. The tribunal noted that the amendment restricting investment to one flat came into effect from 01/04/2015, making the purchase of two adjacent flats permissible under section 54F for the relevant assessment year. The tribunal also highlighted that the spouse's income was declared in the husband's return, justifying the inclusion of dependent's income under section 64 of the Act.

The tribunal observed that the investment in two adjacent flats did not contravene the provisions of section 54F, especially considering the intention to treat them as a single unit. Relying on the order of a co-ordinate bench and a High Court decision, the tribunal allowed the appeal, deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer. The tribunal emphasized the lack of contradictory decisions against the assessee's position and set aside the appeal order, granting the assessee the deduction under section 54F.

In conclusion, the tribunal allowed the appeal, holding that the assessee was eligible for the exemption under section 54F for purchasing two new flats in his wife's name. The tribunal highlighted the compliance with relevant provisions and case laws, ultimately deleting the impugned addition to the assessee's income.

---