https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26899 The court ruled in favor of the assessee, concluding that neither section 52(1) nor section 52(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 applied to the transaction in question. The Revenue failed to establish tax avoidance or understatement of consideration, leading to the dismissal of the departmental appeal. The judgment underscores the significance of evidence and the burden of proof in invoking provisions concerning capital gains taxation. en-us Mon, 06 May 1985 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 09 Feb 2010 12:03:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26899 The court ruled in favor of the assessee, concluding that neither section 52(1) nor section 52(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 applied to the transaction in question. The Revenue failed to establish tax avoidance or understatement of consideration, leading to the dismissal of the departmental appeal. The judgment underscores the significance of evidence and the burden of proof in invoking provisions concerning capital gains taxation. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 06 May 1985 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26899