https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754067 ITAT Mumbai held that the amendment to Section 50C(1) inserting a proviso with effect from A.Y. 2017-18 applies retrospectively to A.Y. 2010-11. Following the Madras HC decision in Vummudi Amarendran, the tribunal ruled that where agreement date and registration date differ, stamp duty value on agreement date should be considered for computing capital gains. The amendment relieves assessee from undue hardship and should apply retrospectively. Capital gains must be recomputed using stamp duty value as on agreement date. Decision favored assessee against revenue. en-us Tue, 28 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 17 Jun 2024 08:44:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754067 ITAT Mumbai held that the amendment to Section 50C(1) inserting a proviso with effect from A.Y. 2017-18 applies retrospectively to A.Y. 2010-11. Following the Madras HC decision in Vummudi Amarendran, the tribunal ruled that where agreement date and registration date differ, stamp duty value on agreement date should be considered for computing capital gains. The amendment relieves assessee from undue hardship and should apply retrospectively. Capital gains must be recomputed using stamp duty value as on agreement date. Decision favored assessee against revenue. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 28 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754067