income tax
Understanding capital gains tax exemptions when purchasing a new home in a relative’s name can be complex. This guide navigates the legal aspects of Sections 54 and 54F of the Income Tax Act, shedding light on prevalent controversies and insights from court cases that can assist investors in claiming exemptions effectively.
Sections 54 and 54F of the Income Tax Act allow individuals to exempt capital gains arising from the sale of long-term capital assets, such as residential properties. A key requirement under both sections is that the eligible assessee must either purchase or construct a residential house within a specified timeframe.
A significant debate exists about whether the new asset must solely be in the name of the assessee claiming the exemption or if it can also be in the name of a relative.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court in **CIT v. Vegetable Products Ltd ** established that if a statutory provision is open to multiple interpretations, the interpretation favoring the taxpayer should be favored.
Conversely, in CIT v. Sun Engg. Works (P.) Ltd, the Supreme Court emphasized the importance of reading a judgment in its entirety. Extracting a statement from a judgment and treating it as universal law is neither desirable nor permissible.
In this case, Mr. Ravindra Arora sold a plot and bought a new house with his wife, claiming full exemption under Section 54F. However, the Assessing Officer allowed only a 50% exemption based on Mr. Arora’s share.
Key findings determined that Mr. Arora solely financed the purchase, including stamp duty and other fees, despite the property being jointly registered. The Delhi High Court ruled that the conditions of Section 54F were met, affirming that including a spouse’s name should not inhibit the exemption.
Mr. Natarajan sold his Bangalore property and purchased a new one in Chennai in his wife's name. The Assessing Officer disallowed the exemption claim.
The Madras High Court ruled that ownership of the new property does not affect the eligibility for exemption under Section 54, as long as the capital gain is assessed against Mr. Natarajan and the investment derives from his sale proceeds.
The consensus among judicial interpretations regarding Section 54F is that the new residential house does not need to be exclusively registered in the assessee's name, provided the entire investment comes from the sale proceeds.
Mr. Ram Kumar sold shares and used the proceeds to purchase a flat for his minor daughter, claiming an exemption under Section 54F. The Assessing Officer rejected this claim due to the registration in the daughter’s name.
However, the ITAT Hyderabad found that Section 54F does not mandate that the asset must solely be in the assessee’s name. It was concluded that since the investment came from Mr. Ram Kumar, he was entitled to the deduction stipulated under Section 54F.
In this case, Ms. Lakshmi sold agricultural land and invested in property for her married daughter, claiming exemption under Section 54F. The claim was rejected on the grounds that the property was registered in the daughter's name.
The ITAT Vishakhapatnam ruled that the benefit of exemption under Section 54F does not extend to a married daughter, emphasizing that ownership implies legal right over the property, contradicting the exemption's intent.
Holding a new asset in the name of close relatives, such as a spouse or minor child, does not preclude capital gains tax exemptions as long as the legal ownership remains with the assessee. Care must be taken to avoid unnecessary inclusion of names on legal documents which may otherwise lead to the denial of exemptions under Sections 54 and 54F of the Income Tax Act.
Investors should be cautious and ensure compliance with legal stipulations when investing in capital assets.