Sec 54 relief allowed to taxpayer who purchased new house jointly in name of married daughter & son-in-law

In matter of Income-tax Officer v. Smt. Rachna Arora, the ITAT adjudged, that Sec 54 relief should be allowed to taxpayer who purchased new house jointly in name of married daughter & son-in-law. Relevant Extract is given below for reference:

6. We have considered the contentions made by both the parties before us. We have also gone through the order of the Ld.CIT(A). The only contention of the Revenue being that the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Dinesh Verma (supra) has not been followed by the Ld.CIT(A),we find that the Ld.CIT(A) had taken note of the said decision. He had, we find, taken note of the decision and applied the same to the facts of the present case noting categorically that though the said decision pertained to claim of exemption u/s 54B of the Act, yet the ratio would be applicable in the instant case also. The Ld.CIT(A), we find, had thereafter proceeded to note the facts of the present case being that the assessee had invested the entire Long Term Capital Gains in the purchase of residential property within the stipulated time, while the AO had restricted the exemption to 34% of the Long Term Capital Gains without acknowledging the fact that the assessee had invested the entire Long Term Capital Gains in the purchase of residential property. We have gone through the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court, reproduced in the impugned order, and find that it had allowed exemption of capital gains, to the extent of the sale consideration invested by the assessee in the new asset, denying the exemption to the extent invested by his wife, on noting the fact that the investments in the new property had been made both by the assessee and his wife. The Hon’ble High Court held that the assessee would be entitled to the benefit of exemption u/s 54B only on the amount invested by him after the sale of his original property. Drawing parity from the same, the Ld.CIT(A), we find, has in the present case, noted the fact that the assessee has invested her entire sale consideration in the new property and, therefore, is entitled to exemption of the entire amount of Long Term Capital Gains. We do not find any infirmity in the same. Moreover, the Ld. DR has neither been unable to controvert the facts of the present case as noted by the Ld.CIT(A) nor has pointed out how the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court was applicable against the assessee in the facts of the present case.

7. In view of the same, we do not find any reason to interfere in the order of the Ld.CIT(A). All the grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue are accordingly, dismissed.