https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=59563 The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and directed the Assessing Officer to reconsider the exemption claim under section 54F. It held that ownership of two houses at different times does not disentitle the assessee from claiming exemption, focusing on the date of investment of capital gains. The Tribunal emphasized that the ownership condition applies to the date of transfer of the original asset, not subsequent acquisitions, and highlighted the importance of timing in determining eligibility for the exemption. The relevance of occupancy certificate and completion of construction was deemed irrelevant for claiming relief under section 54F. en-us Tue, 26 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 18 Aug 2012 15:27:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=59563 The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and directed the Assessing Officer to reconsider the exemption claim under section 54F. It held that ownership of two houses at different times does not disentitle the assessee from claiming exemption, focusing on the date of investment of capital gains. The Tribunal emphasized that the ownership condition applies to the date of transfer of the original asset, not subsequent acquisitions, and highlighted the importance of timing in determining eligibility for the exemption. The relevance of occupancy certificate and completion of construction was deemed irrelevant for claiming relief under section 54F. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 26 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=59563