Income Tax

Capital gain deduction u/s 54 for purchase of two flats on different floors allowed by ITAT

Capital gain deduction u/s 54 for purchase of two flats on different floors allowed as flats were one above the other and converted into a single residential duplex unit

The instant appeal was filed by the appellant assessee against he order of the CIT(A) in upholding the action of the Assessing officer making disallowance u/s 54 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 9the Act) for two residential flats.

ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
ABCAUS 2382 (2018) 06 ITAT

The assessee had declared long term capital gains (LTCG) on sale of House Property and had claimed exemption u/s 54 of the Act for purchase of two flats.

The Assessing Officer observed that these two flats purchased by the assessee were located at different floors of the apartment and according to him they did not constitute a single unit entitling the assessee, benefit of exemption u/s 54 in respect of one residential housing.

Assessing Officer further noted that for the one flat, the assessee had not made the full payment.

The AO restricted the exemption u/s 54 in respect of the flat for which full payment had been made and placing reliance on the judgment of decision of Mumbai Tribunal, taxed the balance amount as long term capital gains.

Before the Tribunal the assessee submitted that Section 54 entitles him for a full deduction against the two flat purchased which were adjoining with each other as was evident from the flat numbers.

The Tribunal noted that the Mumbai Tribunal had held that where more than one unit purchased which are adjacent to each other and are converted into one house for the purpose of residence by having common passage, common kitchen etc., it would be a case of investment in one residential house.

It was observed that in the instant case the appellant had purchased two flats at different floors one above the other and made it one single residential duplex unit. Therefore, the assessee was entitled to exemption in respect of investment in both the flats.

Download Full Judgment Click Here >>

Share

Recent Posts

  • Income Tax

Non- payment of cost imposed can’t trigger automatic confirmation of an invalid exparte assessment.

ITAT power to pass such orders "as it thinks fit" implies a judicial discretion to be exercised within the parameters…

17 hours ago
  • Income Tax

Non-deduction of TDS does not make transaction as unexplained in the hands of deductee – ITAT

Mere non-deduction of TDS by the deductor on a transaction does not change the character of the transaction to make…

3 days ago
  • ICAI

Last date to submit MEF 2026-27 extended to 09.09.2026

ICAI has extended the last date to online submit Multipurpose Empanelment Form (MEF)- 2026-27 from 29th August 2026 to 9th…

3 days ago
  • Income Tax

Validity of demand u/s 156 for default u/s 115-O, if assessment order u/s 143(3) has Nil demand

Can a demand notice be issued u/s 156 for non-payment of Dividend tax u/s 115-O, when as per assessment order…

5 days ago
  • Income Tax

Issue already examined and adjudicated by CIT(Appeals), can’t be reopened on same set of facts

The issue already examined and adjudicated by the quasi-judicial authority, i.e., CIT(Appeals), cannot be reopened on the same set of…

6 days ago
  • Income Tax

TDS can’t be denied for non deposit of tax deducted by the deductor – High Court

One TDS is deducted, credit has to follow, failure of deductor to deposit the amount to the credit of the…

7 days ago