<?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>2018 (9) TMI 2158 - ITAT DELHI  </title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462070</link>
    <description>The ITAT Delhi partially allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal regarding exemption under Section 54F on long-term capital gains from sale of residential plot. The tribunal held that exemption could only be granted for one flat, not both, as the two flats were on different storeys and not adjacent, failing to constitute &quot;a residential house&quot; under Section 54F. However, the tribunal rejected the revenue&#039;s argument that exemption should be denied due to incomplete tower construction within three years, ruling that since full payment was made and possession obtained, minor finishing work did not disqualify the exemption. The assessee was granted partial relief with exemption allowed for the higher-value flat investment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 17 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 20 May 2025 18:46:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=823059" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (9) TMI 2158 - ITAT DELHI  </title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462070</link>
      <description>The ITAT Delhi partially allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal regarding exemption under Section 54F on long-term capital gains from sale of residential plot. The tribunal held that exemption could only be granted for one flat, not both, as the two flats were on different storeys and not adjacent, failing to constitute &quot;a residential house&quot; under Section 54F. However, the tribunal rejected the revenue&#039;s argument that exemption should be denied due to incomplete tower construction within three years, ruling that since full payment was made and possession obtained, minor finishing work did not disqualify the exemption. The assessee was granted partial relief with exemption allowed for the higher-value flat investment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 17 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462070</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>