Archive · 10 Sep 2026
Mumbai ITAT Allows ₹23.76 Crore Section 54 Property Claim
Vivek Juneja sold a property that he owned jointly with his mother.
He received ₹23.76 crore as his share of the sale money.
He bought a new flat and spent money to make it suitable for living.
He also put some money into the Capital Gains Account Scheme and later bought two more properties.
Tax officials said he could not claim tax relief for more than one home.
They also questioned some of his renovation expenses.
The Mumbai ITAT disagreed and allowed the claims for this older tax year.
The Tribunal said the law at that time could allow relief for more than one residential house.
The Mumbai ITAT allowed Vivek Juneja’s Section 54 claim for investments in multiple properties.
Juneja had received ₹23.76 crore from selling his 50% share of jointly owned property.
The Tribunal allowed ₹40.44 lakh spent on civil and electrical work to make a flat habitable.
It rejected the tax department’s view that Section 54 relief was limited to one property for AY 2013-14.
The ruling relied on the pre-2015 wording of Section 54 and does not directly govern later assessment years.
- Who
- Vivek Juneja, the Income Tax Department’s Assessing Officer, and the Mumbai Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.
- What
- The ITAT allowed Section 54 relief for investments in multiple residential properties and approved ₹40.44 lakh in expenses to make a flat habitable.
- When
- The ruling was pronounced on 29 May 2026 and concerns Assessment Year 2013-14.
- Where
- The case was decided by the Mumbai bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.
- Why
- The Tribunal found that the law applicable for AY 2013-14 did not specifically bar relief for more than one residential house and that the disputed expenses were supported by evidence.
Tax Department’s Position
ITAT’s Ruling
Relief for multiple properties
Tax Department’s Position
The Assessing Officer argued that Juneja could not claim further Section 54 relief after claiming it for the Raj Classic flat.
ITAT’s Ruling
The ITAT held that the law applicable to AY 2013-14 did not specifically prevent relief when investments were made in more than one residential property.
Applicable wording of Section 54
Tax Department’s Position
The tax department treated the exemption as effectively limited to one property in this case.
ITAT’s Ruling
The Tribunal relied on the earlier wording, “a residential house,” and said courts had interpreted it as capable of covering more than one house before the 2015 amendment.
Expenses to make the flat habitable
Tax Department’s Position
The Assessing Officer said expenses involving air conditioning, painting, polishing, furniture, kitchen cabinets, and appliances were not necessarily required, allowing only ₹20 lakh.
ITAT’s Ruling
The ITAT found the documents and invoices supported the full ₹40.44 lakh expenditure as civil and electrical work and directed deletion of the ₹20.44 lakh disallowance.
- Taxpayer
- Vivek Juneja
- Assessment year
- 2013-14
- Sale proceeds received
- ₹23.76 crore, representing Juneja’s 50% share
- New flat purchase
- ₹4.90 crore at Raj Classic
- Habitation expenses
- ₹40.44 lakh, including civil and electrical work
- Capital Gains Account Scheme deposit
- ₹8.43 crore
- Decision date
- 29 May 2026