https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761046 HC ruled on capital gains computation for ancestral property sold by assessee. ITAT correctly rejected additional evidence (will) produced for first time on appeal without proper application under Rule 46-A. However, HC held family settlement validly transferred property to assessee without requiring registration, as it recorded pre-existing arrangement. For capital gains calculation under Section 49(1)(i), cost of acquisition and indexation must be computed from original purchase date (01.04.1981) by father, not family settlement date (2003). Family arrangements don't constitute taxable transfers. CIT(A)'s order upheld favoring assessee on indexation calculation despite ITAT rejecting will evidence. en-us Wed, 23 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 30 Oct 2024 15:19:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761046 HC ruled on capital gains computation for ancestral property sold by assessee. ITAT correctly rejected additional evidence (will) produced for first time on appeal without proper application under Rule 46-A. However, HC held family settlement validly transferred property to assessee without requiring registration, as it recorded pre-existing arrangement. For capital gains calculation under Section 49(1)(i), cost of acquisition and indexation must be computed from original purchase date (01.04.1981) by father, not family settlement date (2003). Family arrangements don't constitute taxable transfers. CIT(A)'s order upheld favoring assessee on indexation calculation despite ITAT rejecting will evidence. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 23 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761046