https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373725 The Appellate Tribunal partly allowed the appeal by restricting the deduction under section 54F to the amount actually invested within the prescribed period, considering the delay in completing the conveyance deed due to unavoidable circumstances. However, the Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to disallow the claim of depreciation and business expenses due to lack of substantiating evidence, resulting in the dismissal of the assessee's appeal on this issue. en-us Thu, 11 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 16 Jan 2019 14:35:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373725 The Appellate Tribunal partly allowed the appeal by restricting the deduction under section 54F to the amount actually invested within the prescribed period, considering the delay in completing the conveyance deed due to unavoidable circumstances. However, the Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to disallow the claim of depreciation and business expenses due to lack of substantiating evidence, resulting in the dismissal of the assessee's appeal on this issue. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 11 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373725