+
Taxpayer co-owning more than one home can claim benefit
ECONOMY & POLICY

Taxpayer co-owning more than one home can claim benefit

According to the Mumbai branch of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), co-ownership of more than one residential property does not prevent a taxpayer from requesting a tax exemption on long- term capital gains. As investments are usually made in joint names in large families, this judgement, made within the ambit of Section 54F of the Income-tax (I-T) Act, will be advantageous to several taxpayers.

When selling capital assets (other than a home), such as jewellery or stocks, the taxpayer may be eligible for a tax exemption under Section 54F on the resulting "long-term" capital gains. There is no tax obligation if the entire net sale consideration is used to fund the purchase or building of a residential property within the allotted time frame. The tax exemption is granted proportionately when only a portion of the sale consideration is put towards real estate.

The requirement that the taxpayer not hold more than one residential property as of the date of sale of the long-term capital asset is one of the eligibility requirements outlined in Section 54F. In other words, the only home that can be possessed is the one that was built or brought into existence for the purpose of claiming the exemption.

According to the Mumbai branch of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), co-ownership of more than one residential property does not prevent a taxpayer from requesting a tax exemption on long- term capital gains. As investments are usually made in joint names in large families, this judgement, made within the ambit of Section 54F of the Income-tax (I-T) Act, will be advantageous to several taxpayers. When selling capital assets (other than a home), such as jewellery or stocks, the taxpayer may be eligible for a tax exemption under Section 54F on the resulting long-term capital gains. There is no tax obligation if the entire net sale consideration is used to fund the purchase or building of a residential property within the allotted time frame. The tax exemption is granted proportionately when only a portion of the sale consideration is put towards real estate. The requirement that the taxpayer not hold more than one residential property as of the date of sale of the long-term capital asset is one of the eligibility requirements outlined in Section 54F. In other words, the only home that can be possessed is the one that was built or brought into existence for the purpose of claiming the exemption.

Next Story
Infrastructure Urban

Budget Proposal Aims to Boost Investments

The recent budget proposal has introduced measures designed to promote investments and generate job opportunities across various industries, as reported by the Economic Times. This initiative seeks to stimulate economic activity and strengthen the country's growth trajectory by encouraging both domestic and foreign investments. Key aspects of the proposal include targeted incentives for sectors poised for expansion, such as renewable energy, infrastructure, and technology. The government aims to create a more favorable investment climate by offering tax benefits, subsidies, and streamlined reg..

Next Story
Infrastructure Urban

Indian Financial System Resilient Amidst Challenges

The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) Deputy Governor M. Rajeshwar Rao has emphasized the robust nature of the Indian financial system despite global economic headwinds, according to Economic Times. Rao?s comments reflect confidence in the stability and resilience of India's financial sector amidst a backdrop of international economic uncertainties and financial volatility. Rao highlighted that India?s financial system is well-equipped to handle external shocks due to its solid regulatory framework and prudent risk management practices. The country?s banking sector has demonstrated resilience throug..

Next Story
Infrastructure Energy

SC Allows State Tax on Mines, Minerals

Opposition leaders have welcomed the Supreme Court's recent decision permitting states to levy taxes on mines and mineral-bearing lands, as reported. The ruling is seen as a significant victory for state governments seeking greater control and revenue from natural resource extraction within their jurisdictions. The Supreme Court?s decision empowers states to impose taxes on mining operations and mineral-rich lands, which could enhance their revenue streams and enable better management of local resources. This move is particularly important for states with substantial mineral resources, as it a..

Talk to us?