2013 (1) TMI 401

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... and the following substantial question of law is framed:-   "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on a proper interpretation of Section 54F of the Income Tax Act 1961, the Tribunal was right in law in allowing the deduction of Rs.51,25,100/- claimed by the assessee under that Section?" 3. The assessee is an individual. He retired from IOCL. His income consists of income by way of salary, from house property and other sources. He inherited 50% share in a residential house in E-2/13, Vasant Vihar, Delhi in 2003 from his father. This was in July 1968. The other half share was inherited by his brother. In the year which ended on 31.03.2008, both the brothers jointly sold the property which gave rise to propo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....view was taken but preferred the view taken by the Madras and Karnataka High Courts adopting the rule laid down by the Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Vegetable Products Ltd : 88 ITR 192 which says that if a statutory provision is capable of more than one view, then the view which favours the tax payer should be preferred. The Tribunal also observed that Section 54F being a beneficial provision enacted for encouraging investment in residential houses should be liberally interpreted. 7. We have no hesitation in agreeing with the view taken by the Tribunal. Apart from the fact that the judgments of the Madras and Karnataka High Courts (supra) are in favour of the assessee, the revenue fairly brought to our notice a similar view of this Court in C....