https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792840 For assessment year 2013-14, section 54 was applied in its unamended form, and the phrase "a residential house" was treated as not restricting exemption to only one residential property. The amendment effective from 1 April 2015 was considered prospective, so it could not be applied to deny relief for an earlier year. On the procedural point, delay in filing the appeal was explained by advanced age, health difficulties, and lack of immediate legal assistance, and the explanation was not controverted. The delay was therefore condoned, and the disallowance relating to the second residential house was deleted. en-us Fri, 15 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 04 Jun 2026 08:37:33 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792840 For assessment year 2013-14, section 54 was applied in its unamended form, and the phrase "a residential house" was treated as not restricting exemption to only one residential property. The amendment effective from 1 April 2015 was considered prospective, so it could not be applied to deny relief for an earlier year. On the procedural point, delay in filing the appeal was explained by advanced age, health difficulties, and lack of immediate legal assistance, and the explanation was not controverted. The delay was therefore condoned, and the disallowance relating to the second residential house was deleted. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 15 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792840