Panattu Urumise Chacko vs. The Income Tax Officer

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed by the NFAC, Delhi dated 22/09/2023 in DIN No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1056428966(1) for the assessment year 2017-18. The deduction claimed by the assessee under section 54 of the Act was denied by the AO on the reasoning that the new house was not constructed within 3 years. The assessee appealed against the order of the ld. CIT(A). The AR admitted there was a delay in obtaining the occupancy certificate due to floods in 2018 and 2019, but the assessee had made substantial investment in the property. The DR supported the orders of the authorities below.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the assessee is entitled to the deduction under section 54 of the Act despite the delay in obtaining the occupancy certificate?

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• Jagadish Gangappa vs. The Income Tax Officer

  Bangalore bench

• Bhima Jewellers & Diamonds Vs. The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax

  Cochin bench

• Mayura Mohta Vs. DCIT, Circle-29

  Kolkata benchAY 2017-18Allowed

• Panniyankara Service Co-op. Bank Ltd. vs. The Income Tax Officer - 1(3)

  Cochin bench

• Changanachery North Service Co-op. Bank Ltd. vs. The Income Tax Officer

  Cochin bench

• Ramautar Saraf (HUF) Vs. ITO, Ward 59(3)

  Kolkata benchAY 2016-17Allowed