https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436038 The appellant's excess deduction claim under section 10 of the Income Tax Act was partially disallowed by the Assessing Officer, leading to a reopening of the case. Additionally, the claim of deduction under section 54 was disallowed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, who deemed the gain as Short Term Capital Gain instead of Long Term Capital Gain. The appellant appealed, arguing that the holding period for capital gains should be calculated from the agreement date in 2009. The Tribunal sided with the appellant, considering the gain as Long Term Capital Gain and allowing the appeal, quashing the Principal Commissioner's order. en-us Fri, 31 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 01 Apr 2023 13:21:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436038 The appellant's excess deduction claim under section 10 of the Income Tax Act was partially disallowed by the Assessing Officer, leading to a reopening of the case. Additionally, the claim of deduction under section 54 was disallowed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, who deemed the gain as Short Term Capital Gain instead of Long Term Capital Gain. The appellant appealed, arguing that the holding period for capital gains should be calculated from the agreement date in 2009. The Tribunal sided with the appellant, considering the gain as Long Term Capital Gain and allowing the appeal, quashing the Principal Commissioner's order. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 31 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436038