<?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>Assessee Allowed Section 54 Deduction Despite No Possession or Registration Due to Legal Impediment</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=91257</link>
    <description>The ITAT allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal, holding that the denial of deduction under section 54 was unjustified. Despite the absence of possession and registration of the property due to a Supreme Court-imposed legal impediment, the assessee had entered into a valid agreement and made substantial payment prior to filing the return. The Tribunal applied a purposive interpretation of section 54 read with section 2(47), recognizing &quot;purchase&quot; in a broader sense to uphold the exemption from long-term capital gains tax. It distinguished prior precedents related to the Transfer of Property Act, emphasizing that the intention of the legislature is to avoid taxing capital gains where the consideration is invested in property acquisition, even if formal transfer is delayed by circumstances beyond the assessee&#039;s control. Consequently, the assessee was entitled to claim deduction under section 54.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2025 07:54:27 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2025 07:54:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=840951" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Assessee Allowed Section 54 Deduction Despite No Possession or Registration Due to Legal Impediment</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=91257</link>
      <description>The ITAT allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal, holding that the denial of deduction under section 54 was unjustified. Despite the absence of possession and registration of the property due to a Supreme Court-imposed legal impediment, the assessee had entered into a valid agreement and made substantial payment prior to filing the return. The Tribunal applied a purposive interpretation of section 54 read with section 2(47), recognizing &quot;purchase&quot; in a broader sense to uphold the exemption from long-term capital gains tax. It distinguished prior precedents related to the Transfer of Property Act, emphasizing that the intention of the legislature is to avoid taxing capital gains where the consideration is invested in property acquisition, even if formal transfer is delayed by circumstances beyond the assessee&#039;s control. Consequently, the assessee was entitled to claim deduction under section 54.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2025 07:54:27 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=91257</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>