https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784993 Whether capital gains reinvestment exemption applies where assessee allegedly owned multiple houses, jointly constructed a new house, and received gifted shares. The vacant land with an industrial factory was characterized as non-residential based on usage and tenant confirmation, and thus excluded from counting as a residential house for the proviso, disapplying sub-clause (i) in that respect. Jointly held family property was not treated as exclusively owned and therefore did not disentitle the claim. Direct application of sale proceeds was not required where construction cost met the investment test. Allegation of colourable device and clubbing was rejected on the factual matrix and cultural considerations, exemption allowed. en-us Mon, 12 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 15 Jan 2026 08:41:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784993 Whether capital gains reinvestment exemption applies where assessee allegedly owned multiple houses, jointly constructed a new house, and received gifted shares. The vacant land with an industrial factory was characterized as non-residential based on usage and tenant confirmation, and thus excluded from counting as a residential house for the proviso, disapplying sub-clause (i) in that respect. Jointly held family property was not treated as exclusively owned and therefore did not disentitle the claim. Direct application of sale proceeds was not required where construction cost met the investment test. Allegation of colourable device and clubbing was rejected on the factual matrix and cultural considerations, exemption allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 12 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784993