TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (1) TMI 1163
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssessment year 2020-21 in pursuance to directions of learned Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP). 2. The additional ground raised by the assessee vide letter dated 13.11.2023, stating that the directions issued by learned DRP under section 144C(5) of the Act dated 16.05.2023 does not bear the DIN Number, was stated to be not pressed by the learned AR at the time of hearing. The same is reckoned as a statement made from the bar and accordingly, the additional ground raised by the assessee is hereby dismissed as not pressed. 3. Though, the assessee has raised several grounds before us, the only effective issue to be decided in this appeal is as to whether the learned CIT(A) was justified in confirming the action of the learned AO in denying ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....la, Sector-15, Gurgaon, Haryana-122001 Deposit with builder since 10.08.2010 and possessing of property still no provided by the builder. Not to be considered as House property and same is evident from the schedule House Property of ITR Yes 3. 1 BHK Studio Apartment, Sector -109, Gurgaon, Haryaya-122017 Booking amount of Rs. 30 lacs paid on 10.04.2014 to builder and possessing of property still not provided by the builder, since project under dispute. Not to be considered as House property and same it is evident from the schedule House property of ITR No 4. ½ share of Plot No. 10, Ground Floor & First Floor, Padmini Enclave, New Delhi-110018 Sale consideration of long-term capital assets invested in this re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r and possession of the property was not handed over, since the project is under dispute. Hence, such property cannot be construed as a property owned by the assessee as on the date of transfer of original capital asset. 8. The Learned AO, however, did not heed to any of the aforesaid contentions and proceeded to deny exemption claimed by the assessee under section 54F of the Act in respect of reinvestment made in the property of Padmini Enclave on the ground that assessee was owning more than one house property as on the date of transfer of original capital asset. 9. We find that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of CIT Vs. Balbir Singh Maini reported in 398 ITR 531 (SC) and Suraj Lamp & Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Haryana repo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of transfer of the original asset, any residential house" is used in the proviso with reference to "the residential house, the income of which is chargeable under the head 'Income from house property" (underlined ours). In other words, the expression "own any residential house" is used with a reference to the income of which is chargeable under the head "Income from house property". The Legislature has inserted sections 22 to 26 in the Income-tax Act for the purpose of determining the income, which is chargeable under the head "Income from house property" Section 22 to section 26 of the Act provides the manner of computing the income from house property chargeable to tax under the head "Income from house property". Section 22 charges t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Act, the meaning of "own" or "owner" is to be understood in the same sense in which it is understood for the purpose of sections 22 to 26 of the Act." 11. We have gone through the said judgment and, in our considered opinion, the said judgement could be relied upon only for the limited proposition of the fact that registration of a property need not be made mandatory for determining as to whether a particular assessee could be construed as the owner of the residential property. It is important to note that in the case before Pune Tribunal, possession of the property was duly handed over to that assessee. Whereas, possession of the property in respect of property referred to in serial no. 2 and 3 in the above table, was not handed over....