2020 (4) TMI 814

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....essee as per the provisions of proviso a(ii) of section 54F(1) without considering proviso (b). He submitted that since the word used between proviso (a) and (b) is 'and', both the proviso have to be examined simultaneously and as per the provisions contained in proviso (b), even if the assessee is owning more than one residential house other than the new asset on the date of the transfer of the original asset, it has to be seen as to whether income from such residential houses is chargeable under the head "Income from house property". He submitted that since this aspect was not examined and decided, there is an apparent mistake in the impugned Tribunal order which should be rectified or this Tribunal order should be recalled for the purpos....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ontained in this sub-section shall apply where- (a) the assessee,- (i) owns more than one residential house, other than the new asset, on the date of transfer of the original asset; or (ii) purchases any residential house, other than the new asset, within a period of one year after the date of transfer of the original asset; or (iii) constructs any residential house, other than the new asset, within a period of three years after the date of transfer of the original asset; and (b) the income from such residential house, other than the one residential house owned on the date of transfer of the original asset, is chargeable under the head "Income from house property". 4. As per the provisions contained in proviso to section 54F(1) a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... period of one year after the date of transfer of original asset, deduction is not allowable u/s. 54F (1). Hence whether the deduction u/s. 54F (1) is allowable in respect of second property or first property, it is not material because in both the situations, the proviso will be operating and as a result, the assessee will not be eligible for deduction u/s. 54F (1). In view of these facts and legal position, we hold that there is no infirmity in the order of CIT(A) as per which he has held that assessee is not eligible for deduction u/s. 54F (1) in the facts of present case." 5. As per the above para reproduced from the Tribunal order, it is seen that there is discussion in respect of proviso a (ii) of section 54F(1) but there is no dis....