1. In order to avail exemption u/s 54 assessee should have invested the amount of capital gain in another residential house. The Madras High Court in CIT vs. V.Natarajan (2006) 287 ITR 271 (Mad) has held that such exemption is allowed to an assessee even in a case where investment in a residential house is made in the name of a spouse.
2. In CIT vs. C.F.Thomas (2006) 284 ITR 557 (Ker) the assessee gave lease of commercial property for 20 years, which was a compulsorily registerable document under the Registration Act, 1908. The Court held any transaction by way of any agreement or arrangement which has the effect of transferring or enabling the enjoyment of any immovable property is a transfer and accordingly the transaction is liable for capital gains tax.
3. In CIT vs. Union Co (Motors) Ltd (2006) 283 ITR 445 (Mad) the assessee sold land with building with a condition that the purchaser would demolish the super structure. The court held that the consideration for transfer apparently relates to land and the building had no value and also got demolished by the vendee. The building though was subjected to depreciation earlier, the consideration received on transfer was held as attributable only to land and nothing towards building.
