Mis-declaration in import descriptions must be deliberate to justify confiscation; withheld contemporaneous import documents invalidate value redeterm...
Liability for EPCG export shortfall: duty and interest sustained, but confiscation and penalties quashed where no fraud and causes beyond importer con...
ITAT held that for deduction under section 54F, the decisive question was whether the disputed property could legally be treated as a residential house on the relevant date. On the basis of the registered purchase deed, later sale deed and the purchaser's notarised affidavit, the property was found to be open land fit for inhabitation, not a residential premises. Its appearance in the balance sheet at a stated value did not prove residential character. As the assessee was therefore not shown to own more than one residential house, the statutory condition for denial of deduction was not met and the deduction was rightly allowed.
ITAT held that for deduction under section 54F, the decisive question was whether the disputed property could legally be treated as a residential house on the relevant date. On the basis of the registered purchase deed, later sale deed and the purchaser's notarised affidavit, the property was found to be open land fit for inhabitation, not a residential premises. Its appearance in the balance sheet at a stated value did not prove residential character. As the assessee was therefore not shown to own more than one residential house, the statutory condition for denial of deduction was not met and the deduction was rightly allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4811 
Join Channel 
