<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2021 (7) TMI 1240 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410398</link>
    <description>Deduction under section 54F could not be denied merely because the conveyance deed for the residential property was not yet registered, where the assessee had paid consideration, obtained possession, and produced supporting documents such as the agreement to sell, power of attorney, possession letter, utility bills and photographs. The Tribunal applied the wider income-tax concept of ownership and treated registration of a formal sale deed as non-decisive once possession and dominion over the property were established. It also construed section 54F as a beneficial provision. The addition made by the Assessing Officer was therefore unjustified.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 30 Jul 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 31 Jul 2021 09:47:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=651238" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (7) TMI 1240 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410398</link>
      <description>Deduction under section 54F could not be denied merely because the conveyance deed for the residential property was not yet registered, where the assessee had paid consideration, obtained possession, and produced supporting documents such as the agreement to sell, power of attorney, possession letter, utility bills and photographs. The Tribunal applied the wider income-tax concept of ownership and treated registration of a formal sale deed as non-decisive once possession and dominion over the property were established. It also construed section 54F as a beneficial provision. The addition made by the Assessing Officer was therefore unjustified.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 30 Jul 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410398</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>