Revenue authority mandates using scheme-specific reversal procedures, not revising original entries, for instrument-based trade/customs benefits effec...
ITAT dismissed the revenue's appeal, upholding the Tribunal's and CIT(A)'s findings that the assessee is entitled to deduction under section 54 in respect of the new residential property despite joint acquisition with a son-in-law, because the AO's 50% restriction was not substantiated and the amount of investment was undisputed. The Tribunal further upheld the cost of acquisition adopted by the assessee, accepting the valuation report and noting consistency with stamp duty valuation as of 01.04.2001, finding no contravention of the proviso to section 55(2)(b). Consequently the AO's adjustments were overturned and the impugned assessment was restored in favour of the assessee.
ITAT dismissed the revenue's appeal, upholding the Tribunal's and CIT(A)'s findings that the assessee is entitled to deduction under section 54 in respect of the new residential property despite joint acquisition with a son-in-law, because the AO's 50% restriction was not substantiated and the amount of investment was undisputed. The Tribunal further upheld the cost of acquisition adopted by the assessee, accepting the valuation report and noting consistency with stamp duty valuation as of 01.04.2001, finding no contravention of the proviso to section 55(2)(b). Consequently the AO's adjustments were overturned and the impugned assessment was restored in favour of the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4821 
Join Channel 
