<?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>2024 (8) TMI 1072 - ITAT JODHPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757368</link>
    <description>The ITAT Jodhpur allowed the appellant&#039;s claim for deduction under Section 54F for investment in three flats (two 1BHK and one 2BHK) located side by side on the same floor of one building, intended to be joined for joint living. The tribunal held that Section 54F requires acquisition of &quot;a residential house&quot; not necessarily a single unit, and multiple flats for residential use satisfy this requirement. The ITAT also allowed deduction for amounts kept in bank for registration, ruling that booking flats under construction constitutes &quot;construction&quot; rather than &quot;purchase,&quot; making the appellant eligible for the three-year construction period benefit. Both additions were deleted and the appeal was allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 05 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 Aug 2024 08:15:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=765074" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (8) TMI 1072 - ITAT JODHPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757368</link>
      <description>The ITAT Jodhpur allowed the appellant&#039;s claim for deduction under Section 54F for investment in three flats (two 1BHK and one 2BHK) located side by side on the same floor of one building, intended to be joined for joint living. The tribunal held that Section 54F requires acquisition of &quot;a residential house&quot; not necessarily a single unit, and multiple flats for residential use satisfy this requirement. The ITAT also allowed deduction for amounts kept in bank for registration, ruling that booking flats under construction constitutes &quot;construction&quot; rather than &quot;purchase,&quot; making the appellant eligible for the three-year construction period benefit. Both additions were deleted and the appeal was allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 05 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757368</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>