Just a moment...

Top
Help
AI Drafter

Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.

Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review

The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.

• Review the issues identified by the AI
• Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required


Step 2 – Draft Generation

Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.

• Relevant statutory provisions
• Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations
• Issue-wise legal analysis
• Practical arguments and supporting content
• Professionally structured draft ready for further review.

Try Now
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2016 (7) TMI 1464

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....opposed to the law and facts of the case. 2. The learned CIT(A) erred in holding that the assessee is entitled for claim of deduction u/s 54 of the IT Act, 1961, in respect of two properties. 3. The learned CIT(A) erred in relying on the decisions of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of D.Ananda Basappa and Khoobchand Makhija since the facts of the case are different in the present case as the assessee had invested in two properties, one at Bangalore and the other at Mumbai. 4. The learned CIT(A) erred in allowing relief and in ignoring the observation of the Hon'ble High Court in the case of Khoobchand M. Makhija (2014) 43 Taxman 143 (Karnataka) wherein before concluding the decision it was hel....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... houses of Rs. 3,93,76,330/- and deduction u/s 54EC of Rs. 33 lakhs. However, the AO was of the opinion that the benefit u/s 54 can be claimed only in respect of one new residential building. Hence, restricted the deduction to Rs. 3,00,00,810/- thus making addition of Rs. 60,81,778/-. 4. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A). The CIT(A), following the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. D.Ananda Basappa (180 taxman 4) and CIT vs. Khoobchand M.Makhija (43 taxmann.143), held that the assessee is entitled to deduction in respect of investment made in two residential houses. 5. Being aggrieved, the revenue is in appeal before us. 6. We heard rival submissions and perused material on reco....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hich he has offered for tax. Therefore, the context in which the expression 'residential house' is used in section 54 makes it clear that it was not the intention of the Legislature to convey the meaning that it refers to a single residential house. The letter 'a' in the context, which is used, should not be construed as meaning singular, but being a 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. [ Para 17 ] Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of this case, the acquisition of two residential houses by the assessee out of the capital....