https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=418036 The HC condoned a substantial delay in filing the revenue's appeal despite an unsatisfactory explanation, taking account of related matters already decided in the assessee's favour. It then held that no substantial question of law arose under section 260A because the Tribunal's findings on the nature of the land as a current asset, the inapplicability of section 45(3), the absence of any colourable device in the revaluation, and the absence of taxable income in the partners' hands were concurrent factual determinations. The revenue's challenge to the Tribunal's order therefore failed and the appeal was dismissed. en-us Mon, 31 Jan 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 05 Feb 2022 23:25:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=418036 The HC condoned a substantial delay in filing the revenue's appeal despite an unsatisfactory explanation, taking account of related matters already decided in the assessee's favour. It then held that no substantial question of law arose under section 260A because the Tribunal's findings on the nature of the land as a current asset, the inapplicability of section 45(3), the absence of any colourable device in the revaluation, and the absence of taxable income in the partners' hands were concurrent factual determinations. The revenue's challenge to the Tribunal's order therefore failed and the appeal was dismissed. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 31 Jan 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=418036