https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12229 The court ruled in favor of the assessee, determining that the compensation received for the destroyed building was not taxable as capital gains. The court clarified that the extinguishment of rights in a capital asset due to its destruction does not constitute a transfer under the Income-tax Act, therefore not subject to taxation. The decision emphasized the distinction between destruction and transfer, highlighting that the asset's continued existence post-transfer is crucial for taxability under capital gains. en-us Tue, 27 Aug 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 20 Feb 2010 11:43:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12229 The court ruled in favor of the assessee, determining that the compensation received for the destroyed building was not taxable as capital gains. The court clarified that the extinguishment of rights in a capital asset due to its destruction does not constitute a transfer under the Income-tax Act, therefore not subject to taxation. The decision emphasized the distinction between destruction and transfer, highlighting that the asset's continued existence post-transfer is crucial for taxability under capital gains. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 27 Aug 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12229