TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (5) TMI 689
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....case are as follows: Assessee, along with his four brothers, had entered into a Joint Development Agreement (JDA) with M/s. Nagarjuna Construction Co. Ltd., (NCC). By virtue of the JDA with NCC, assessee received 15 constructed apartment units. The AO completed the assessment under section 143(3) r.ws. 147 of the Act vide order dated 21.03.2016. In the said Assessment Order, the AO disallowed the claim of deduction under section 54F of the Act in respect of 14 apartment units and allowed the benefit of investment only on one apartment unit by interpreting as "a residential house" as per the provisions of section 54F of the Act as existing during the relevant Assessment Year viz., Assessment Year 2008-09, to mean only one residential unit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The solitary issue for our consideration is whether the CIT(A) is justified in directing the AO to grant deduction under section 54F of the Act in respect of 15 apartment units for the relevant Assessment Year viz., 2008-09. The AO had denied the exemption under section 54F of the Act in respect of 14 apartment units (total claim of deduction under section 54F of the Act for 15 apartment units) for the reason that pursuant to the JDA, assessee had received multiple residential units and not a single residential unit. The provisions of section 54F of the Act was amended vide Finance (No.2) Act, 2014 with effect from 01.04.2015 and has withdrawn deduction for more than one residen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o section 54 of the Act with effect from 01.04.2015 has been held to be prospective by the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Arun K. Thiagarajan (supra). The relevant finding of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Arun K. Thiagarajan (supra), reads as follows:- "12. A Bench of this court in the case of Smt. K. G. Rukminiamma (supra) dealt with the meaning of expression `a residential house' used in Section 54(1) of the Act while taking into account Section 132(2) of the General Clauses Act, 1897 held that unless there is anything repugnant in the subject or context, the words in singular shall include the plural and vice versa. It was further held that context in which the expression `a reside....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d enunciation of law by different High Courts including this court and with a view to give definite meaning to the expression `a residential house', the provisions of section 54(1) were amended with an object to restrict the plurality to mean singularity by substituting the word `a residential house' with the word `one residential house'. The aforesaid amendment came into force with effect from 01.04.2015. The relevant extracts of Explanatory note to provisions of Finance (No.2) Act, 2014 reads as under: 20.3 Certain courts had interpreted that the exemption is also available if investment is made in more than one residential house. The benefit was intended for investment in one residential house within India. According....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eral grounds on which it is based, detached or abstracted from the specific peculiarities of the particular case which gives rise to the decision. [Also see `Sate of Haryana v. Ranbir of Rand, (2006) 5 SCC 167 & Girnar Traders v. State of Maharashtra [2007] 7 SCC 555]. 15. This Court as well as Madras and Delhi High Court have interpreted the expression `a residential house' and have held that the aforesaid expression includes plural. The ratio of the decisions rendered by coordinate bench of this court are binding on us and we respectively agree with the view taken by this court while interpreting the expression `a residential house'. Therefore, the contention of the revenue that the assessee is not entitled to be....