https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378516 The Third Member, in a detailed order dated 10.01.2019, determined that the money equivalent to the enhanced portion of the asset revalued does not constitute a capital asset for tax purposes. Additionally, it was held that there is no transfer of a capital asset on dissolution of a firm or "otherwise" when the partnership firm pays the money equivalent to the retiring partner. Consequently, both the Revenue's and the Assessee's appeals were dismissed on 3rd April 2019. en-us Wed, 03 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 17 Apr 2019 16:13:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378516 The Third Member, in a detailed order dated 10.01.2019, determined that the money equivalent to the enhanced portion of the asset revalued does not constitute a capital asset for tax purposes. Additionally, it was held that there is no transfer of a capital asset on dissolution of a firm or "otherwise" when the partnership firm pays the money equivalent to the retiring partner. Consequently, both the Revenue's and the Assessee's appeals were dismissed on 3rd April 2019. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 03 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378516