TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (3) TMI 101
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 5,000,000.00 26,825,750.00" While completing the assessment the assessing officer took the view that on the terms of the agreement entered into with M/s Thapar Homes Ltd. on 08.05.2006, the cost of construction of the building incurred by the aforesaid company which was the developer of the property would also be included in the total sale consideration. The assessee responded by submitting that the entire cost of construction was incurred by the builder and even if it is considered as part of the sale consideration, since it has been fully invested in the residential house itself, the same would be exempt under Section 54 of the Act. The assessing officer did not accept the assessee's submission. He therefore, added an amount of Rs.3,43,72,529/- which was the cost of construction incurred by the developer to the sale consideration of Rs. four crores received by the assessee and computed the total sale consideration at Rs.7,43,72,529/-. 3. Dealing with the assessee's contention that in any case the sale consideration should be taken as having been invested in the new residential house and thus exempt under Section 54, which was supporte....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... would have used the word "one." As in the earlier part, the words used are buildings or lands which are plural in number and that: is referred to as "a residential house", the original asset. An asset newly acquired after the sale of the original asset also can be buildings or lands appurtenant thereto, which also should be "a residential house." Therefore the letter „a‟ in the context it is used should not be construed as meaning "singular." But, being an indefinite article, the said expression should be read in consonance with the other words 'buildings' and 'lands' and, therefore, the singular 'a residential house' also permits use of plural by virtue of Section 13(2) of the General Clauses Act. - CIT V. D. Ananda Bassappa (2009) 223 (kar) 186 : (2009) 20 DTR (Kar) 266 followed." 7. Upon careful consideration, we find that the contentions of the assessee that the issue is covered in favour of the assessee are correct. 7.1 Ld. Departmental Representative could not controvert the above and no contrary decision was cited before us. 8. Accordingly, we do not find any infirmity or illegality in the order of the Ld. Commi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....our crores which was the cash amount received by the assessee, but the cost of construction incurred by the developer on the development of the property amounting to Rs.3,43,72,529/- should also be added to the sale consideration. The assessee thereupon claimed that if the cost of construction incurred by the builder is to be added to the sale price, then the same should also be correspondingly taken to have been invested in the residential house namely the two floors which the assessee was to get in addition to the cash amount under the agreement with the builder, and the amount so spent on the construction should be allowed as deduction under Section 54 of the Act. It was at this stage that the assessing officer rejected the claim for deduction under Section 54 on the footing that the two floors obtained by the assessee contained two separate residential units having separate entrances and cannot qualify as a single residential unit. He agreed that the assessee was eligible for the relief under Section 54F in respect of the cost of construction incurred on one unit. He noted that the assessee has retained the ground floor and the basement. He therefore, apportioned the constructi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at the phrase "a" residential house would mean one residential house and it does not appear to the correct understanding. The expression "a" residential house should be understood in a sense that building should be of residential in nature and "a" should not be understood to indicate a singular number. The combined reading of sections 54(1) and 54F of the Income- tax Act discloses that, a non residential building can be sold, the capital gain of which can be invested in a residential building to seek exemption of capital gain tax. However, the proviso to section 54 of the Income- tax Act, lays down that if the assessee has already one residential building, he is not entitled to exemption of capital gains tax, when he invests the capital gain in purchase of additional residential building." This judgment was followed by the same High Court in the decision in CIT Vs. Smt. K G Rukminiamma in ITA No.783/2008 dated 27.08.2010. 8. There could also be another angle. Section 54/54F uses the expression "a residential house". The expression used is not "a residential unit". This is a new concept introduced by the assessing officer into the section. Section 54/54F requires the assessee ....