https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468679 Section 54 exemption cannot be denied solely because the unutilised sale consideration was not deposited in the capital gains account scheme before the section 139(1) due date, where the assessee actually invested the capital gains in a new residential house within the prescribed period. The provision was treated as substantive, meant to encourage acquisition of residential property, while the deposit requirement under section 54(2) was viewed as a procedural safeguard. On the facts, purchase of the new house within one year and proof of investment during assessment entitled the assessee to the exemption, and the disallowance was unsustainable. en-us Fri, 22 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 16 May 2026 11:01:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468679 Section 54 exemption cannot be denied solely because the unutilised sale consideration was not deposited in the capital gains account scheme before the section 139(1) due date, where the assessee actually invested the capital gains in a new residential house within the prescribed period. The provision was treated as substantive, meant to encourage acquisition of residential property, while the deposit requirement under section 54(2) was viewed as a procedural safeguard. On the facts, purchase of the new house within one year and proof of investment during assessment entitled the assessee to the exemption, and the disallowance was unsustainable. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 22 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468679