Tag: deduction u/s 54F
Capital Gain Exemption u/s 54 and 54F for investment in residential house limited to Rs. 10 crores Section 54 and section 54F of the Income-tax, 1961 allows deduction on the Capital gains arising from the transfer of long-term capital asset if an assessee, within a period of one …
Capital Gain exemption u/s 54F denied for want of proof of delay in construction by the builder as per time frame. ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 3645 (2023) (01) ITAT Important Case Laws relied upon:T Shiva Kumar vs ITO 9158 ITD 329Satish Chandra Gupta vs AO (54 ITD 508) ACIT …
Deduction u/s 54. Assessee cannot be blamed for the delay in housing projects by the builder as sections 54 and 54F are beneficial provisions. In a recent judgment, ITAT has held that deduction u/s 54 can not be denied for the delay in housing projects by the builder …
Exemption u/s 54F allowed though Capital Gain sale proceed deposited in Nationalised Bank instead of capital gain deposit scheme account ABCAUS Case Law CitationABCAUS 3530 (2021) (07) ITAT In this case appeal was filed by the assessee against the order of the CIT(A) sustaining the addition made by …
Sale of property was long term capital gain as assessee held it from the date of advance payment and balance payment was only a follow up action ABCAUS Case Law CitationABCAUS 3502 (2021) (05) ITAT Important case law relied referredCIT vs A Suresh Rao 223 Taxmann 228 (Kar)Principal …
Renovation of residential house allowable exemption u/s 54F as it amounts to construction of a residential house. ABCAUS Case Law CitationABCAUS 3393 (2020) (09) ITAT Important case law relied upon by the parties:CIT Vs. Godavari Devi Saraf (1978) 113 ITR 589 (Bom) In the instant case, the assessee …
Capital gain to be computed first applying exemption and then provisions for set off of capital loss ABACUS Case Law CitationABCAUS 3369 (2020) (08) ITAT Important case law relied upon by the parties:CIT vs Vijay M. Mahtaney 35 taxmann.com 228 (Mad) In the instant case, the assessee had …
Exemption u/s 54F for investment in name of wife allowed when non-jurisdictional High Courts had different opinions and no decision was from jurisdictional HC ABACUS Case Law CitationABCAUS 3357 (2020) (08) ITAT Important case law relied upon by the parties:CIT vs. Podar Cement (P.) Ltd. 226 ITR 625(SC)Mysore …
No bar in claiming deduction u/s 54F in reopening proceedings u/s 147. ITAT direct Assessing Officer to decide exemption afresh ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 3324 (2020) (06) ITAT In the instant case, the appeal of the assessee was directed against the ex parte order passed by the …
Exemption u/s 54F allowed as vendor insisted for execution of two sale deeds to avoid TDS as agreement for purchase of property was not disputed ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 3319 (2020) (06) ITAT In the instant case, the appeal was filed by the assessee against the order passed …
