https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=89294 ITAT partially allowed the appeal. The tribunal held that technical delays in reinvestment of capital gains should not automatically disqualify tax exemptions under Sections 54F and 54B, provided the fundamental intent of reinvestment is fulfilled. However, the exemption claim for agricultural land purchased in the brother's name was rejected, as the statute explicitly requires ownership in the assessee's name. The AO was directed to recompute taxable capital gains by allowing proportionate exemptions for investments made beyond prescribed time limits, while disallowing the exemption for the brother's land purchase. en-us Wed, 11 Jun 2025 08:36:45 +0530 Wed, 11 Jun 2025 08:36:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=89294 ITAT partially allowed the appeal. The tribunal held that technical delays in reinvestment of capital gains should not automatically disqualify tax exemptions under Sections 54F and 54B, provided the fundamental intent of reinvestment is fulfilled. However, the exemption claim for agricultural land purchased in the brother's name was rejected, as the statute explicitly requires ownership in the assessee's name. The AO was directed to recompute taxable capital gains by allowing proportionate exemptions for investments made beyond prescribed time limits, while disallowing the exemption for the brother's land purchase. Highlights Income Tax Wed, 11 Jun 2025 08:36:45 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=89294