https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202840 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision allowing exemption under Section 54F for investment in additional construction in an existing property, dismissing the Revenue's appeal. However, a separate judgment by a member disagreed, stating that owning any residential property at the time of sale disqualifies the assessee from the exemption. The majority opinion favored disallowing the exemption. Regarding the validity of reopening assessment under Section 148, the Tribunal found the reopening valid and dismissed the assessee's cross-objection on both limitation and merits grounds. en-us Mon, 25 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 16 Sep 2021 17:29:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202840 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision allowing exemption under Section 54F for investment in additional construction in an existing property, dismissing the Revenue's appeal. However, a separate judgment by a member disagreed, stating that owning any residential property at the time of sale disqualifies the assessee from the exemption. The majority opinion favored disallowing the exemption. Regarding the validity of reopening assessment under Section 148, the Tribunal found the reopening valid and dismissed the assessee's cross-objection on both limitation and merits grounds. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 25 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202840