https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12702 The court ruled in favor of the assessee, holding that the disallowance of a short-term capital loss was unjustified. It concluded that the transaction did not fall under the provisions of section 47(iv) of the Income-tax Act as the subsidiary relationship was not established as per the Companies Act. The court emphasized the need for a strict interpretation of exceptions to taxing capital gains. The Revenue's argument to apply the Companies Act definition of "subsidiary company" was rejected, and the court found in favor of the assessee on both issues, disposing of the reference without costs. en-us Wed, 10 Oct 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 03 May 2010 01:12:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12702 The court ruled in favor of the assessee, holding that the disallowance of a short-term capital loss was unjustified. It concluded that the transaction did not fall under the provisions of section 47(iv) of the Income-tax Act as the subsidiary relationship was not established as per the Companies Act. The court emphasized the need for a strict interpretation of exceptions to taxing capital gains. The Revenue's argument to apply the Companies Act definition of "subsidiary company" was rejected, and the court found in favor of the assessee on both issues, disposing of the reference without costs. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 10 Oct 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12702