https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278501 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, allowing the claim for exemption under section 54 for both residential houses. The Tribunal held that the term "a" should not be equated to "one," based on precedents from the Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh High Courts. The Tribunal emphasized the broader interpretation of the term "a residential house" and rejected the restrictive interpretation by the Departmental Authorities. The appeal was allowed in favor of the assessee, affirming the entitlement to claim exemption for investments in multiple residential houses under section 54 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. en-us Fri, 04 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 08 Feb 2019 06:28:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278501 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, allowing the claim for exemption under section 54 for both residential houses. The Tribunal held that the term "a" should not be equated to "one," based on precedents from the Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh High Courts. The Tribunal emphasized the broader interpretation of the term "a residential house" and rejected the restrictive interpretation by the Departmental Authorities. The appeal was allowed in favor of the assessee, affirming the entitlement to claim exemption for investments in multiple residential houses under section 54 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 04 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278501