a) Assessee had sold shares and utilised long term capital gains from such sale of shares to purchase property which was comprised of land along with such building. He claimed exemption under section 54F.
b) Assessing Officer (AO) held that as per provisions of section 54F only investment in a residential house property is eligible for deduction. Land in one schedule had no residential building and therefore exemption under section 54F wasn’t available.
c) On appeal, CIT(A) allowed claim of assessee. Aggrieved-revenue filed the instant appeal before the Tribunal.
The Tribunal held in the favour of assessee as under:
1) As per Section 54F, exemption is allowable in respect of amount invested in construction of residential house property. Nothing is mentioned in Section 54F that deduction couldn’t be allowed on acquisition on land appurtenant to the building or on the land on which building is being constructed.
2) When the land was purchased and building was constructed thereon, it was not necessary that such construction should be on the entire plot of land, meaning thereby a part of the land which was appurtenant to the building and on which no construction was made, there was no denial of exemption on such investment.
3) Contention of revenue that exemption under section 54F was eligible only for construction of house wasn’t tenable. Exemption couldn’t be denied on the land appurtenant to building if all the other conditions of section 54F were satisfied.
4) Thus, the cost of vacant land appurtenant to and forming part of the residential unit was to be considered for claim of exemption under section 54F even if no construction had been done on the appurtenant land.  82 taxmann.com 93 (Chennai)