TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (8) TMI 1745
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (A) is not justified in holding that the appellant is not entitled to exemption u/s 54 in respect of 2 other flats that were gifted by the appellant after the end of the year under appeal which was not relevant to judge the maintainability of the claim for the year under appeal and hence, the learned Cit (A) ought to have allowed entire exemption for all the 3 flats to be received by the appellant." 3. Learned AR of the assessee submitted that it is noted by CIT (A) in Para 9.1 on page 21 of his order that 3 apartments are allocated to the assessee and for these three apartments, the assessee has claimed deduction u/s 54. He pointed out that in the same Para, this fact is also noted that out of these three flats, one flat is on Ground Flo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ouse. He submitted a copy of this judgment of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court and pointed out that in that case, the assessment year involved was A. Y. 1968 - 69 and there is amendment in the provisions of section 54. He pointed out that Hon'ble Gujarat High Court has reproduced the provisions of section 54 as was on the statute book in that period and pointed out that as per the same, there was a specific condition in section 54 that the new residential house acquired by the assessee for claiming deduction u/s 54 should be for the purpose of the assessee's own residence. He submitted that this vital difference in the provisions of section 54 was not pointed out to the tribunal in the case of Arun Kumar Nathan (Supra) and therefore, this tribuna....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of law that the new residential house acquired by the assessee for claiming deduction u/s 54 should be for the purpose of the assessee's own residence. The tribunal order followed by CIT (A) having been rendered in the case of Arun Kumar Nathan (Supra) does not lay down a binding precedence because in this tribunal order, a judgment of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court rendered in the case of CIT vs. Nathu Hansraj (Supra) was followed without noticing the changes in the provisions of section 54 in A. Y. 1958 - 69 and 2013 - 14 which was before the tribunal in this case. Hence, on this aspect of the objection of the lower authorities that the new two flats are not for own residential use of the assessee, I find no merit because there is no such re....