https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762611 ITAT Chennai allowed the assessee's appeal regarding LTCG deduction u/s 54. AO and CIT(A) denied the deduction, arguing the assessee had multiple residential properties through a GPA transaction with a co-parcener. ITAT held that GPA transactions don't convey title or create interest in immovable property, citing SC precedent in Suraj Lamp Industries. Since no consideration was paid to the co-parcener and no possession transferred, it wasn't a valid transfer under law. The actual transaction was between the HUF and three property owners, making the deduction allowable. en-us Fri, 29 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 03 Dec 2024 09:39:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762611 ITAT Chennai allowed the assessee's appeal regarding LTCG deduction u/s 54. AO and CIT(A) denied the deduction, arguing the assessee had multiple residential properties through a GPA transaction with a co-parcener. ITAT held that GPA transactions don't convey title or create interest in immovable property, citing SC precedent in Suraj Lamp Industries. Since no consideration was paid to the co-parcener and no possession transferred, it wasn't a valid transfer under law. The actual transaction was between the HUF and three property owners, making the deduction allowable. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 29 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762611