https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=394310 The judgment clarified that exemption under section 54F can be claimed even if the investment in a new residential property is not in the assessee's name. The court emphasized that investing the sale proceeds in acquiring or constructing residential premises is sufficient to qualify for the deduction under section 54. The Assessing Officer and CIT(A) were directed to reconsider the issue, focusing on whether the investment in the new property was made from the sale consideration received. The judgment highlighted that imposing a requirement for the property to be in the assessee's name would be unwarranted and contrary to legislative intent. en-us Mon, 27 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 07 Apr 2020 18:17:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=394310 The judgment clarified that exemption under section 54F can be claimed even if the investment in a new residential property is not in the assessee's name. The court emphasized that investing the sale proceeds in acquiring or constructing residential premises is sufficient to qualify for the deduction under section 54. The Assessing Officer and CIT(A) were directed to reconsider the issue, focusing on whether the investment in the new property was made from the sale consideration received. The judgment highlighted that imposing a requirement for the property to be in the assessee's name would be unwarranted and contrary to legislative intent. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 27 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=394310