https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=412055 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, allowing the deduction under section 54F of the Income Tax Act. Despite the new house not being fully completed within three years, the assessee was entitled to a proportionate deduction based on their investment. Precedents from the Karnataka High Court supported the assessee's claim, emphasizing that even incomplete construction did not disqualify them from the deduction. The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to compute the deduction based on the construction costs incurred by the assessee, clarifying that investments made before one year of the original asset's sale were not eligible for the deduction. en-us Mon, 06 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 Sep 2021 08:19:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=412055 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, allowing the deduction under section 54F of the Income Tax Act. Despite the new house not being fully completed within three years, the assessee was entitled to a proportionate deduction based on their investment. Precedents from the Karnataka High Court supported the assessee's claim, emphasizing that even incomplete construction did not disqualify them from the deduction. The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to compute the deduction based on the construction costs incurred by the assessee, clarifying that investments made before one year of the original asset's sale were not eligible for the deduction. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 06 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=412055