https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794976 Under the pre-amendment section 54F applicable to Assessment Year 2009-10, investment in multiple residential units did not bar deduction because the later restriction to "one residential house" operated prospectively. Construction need not conform to an approved building plan, nor must statutory approval be produced, as section 54F requires construction within the prescribed period rather than plan compliance. A valuation report establishing timely construction could support the claim despite incomplete bank statements; any separate concern regarding the investment source could be examined under relevant provisions. The notes state that the corresponding addition was directed to be deleted. en-us Wed, 25 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 15 Jul 2026 08:22:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794976 Under the pre-amendment section 54F applicable to Assessment Year 2009-10, investment in multiple residential units did not bar deduction because the later restriction to "one residential house" operated prospectively. Construction need not conform to an approved building plan, nor must statutory approval be produced, as section 54F requires construction within the prescribed period rather than plan compliance. A valuation report establishing timely construction could support the claim despite incomplete bank statements; any separate concern regarding the investment source could be examined under relevant provisions. The notes state that the corresponding addition was directed to be deleted. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 25 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794976