https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183029 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, allowing the balance claim under section 54 as the entire capital gain was reinvested before the extended due date for filing the return, contrary to the Assessing Officer's disallowance based on non-appropriation before the original due date. The Tribunal's decision aligned with the appellant's argument that the extended due date under section 139(4) should be considered alongside the initial due date under section 139(1), supported by a High Court precedent. en-us Wed, 10 Jul 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 02 Aug 2017 09:47:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183029 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, allowing the balance claim under section 54 as the entire capital gain was reinvested before the extended due date for filing the return, contrary to the Assessing Officer's disallowance based on non-appropriation before the original due date. The Tribunal's decision aligned with the appellant's argument that the extended due date under section 139(4) should be considered alongside the initial due date under section 139(1), supported by a High Court precedent. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 10 Jul 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183029