Where consideration received on transfer of property had been invested by assessee in construction of residential house, merely because construction was not completed in all respects within stipulated period, benefit of section 54F, could not be denied.
The Tribunal held in favour of assessee as under:
1) It was clear from the order of the CIT (A) that the assessee had commenced construction of the building within a period of three years from the date of transfer of property. The construction, however, could not be completed by the assessee within three years;
2) The Karnataka High Court in case of CIT v. Sambandam Udaykumar  19 taxmann.com 17 had taken a view that under the provisions of section 54F, the condition precedent was that the capital gain realized from sale of capital asset should have been parted by the assessee and invested in construction of a residential house;
3) Benefit of section 54F couldn’t be denied to assessee if the money was invested in constructing the residential house, even if the construction was not completed in all respects and house was not in a condition to be occupied within the stipulated period;
4) There is no particular stage of completion of construction that is contemplated by the provision. Therefore, the benefit of deduction under section 54F was to be allowed to the assessee – ITO v. Smt. B.S. Shanthakumari  41 taxmann.com 325 (Bangalore - Trib.)