https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773978 ITAT Delhi allowed the assessee's appeal regarding loss on Amritsar real estate project write-off. Lower authorities incorrectly determined the loss crystallization date as 2009, but ITAT found disputes between parties continued until compromise deed dated 20-7-2012. The loss crystallized in 2012, making the claim in AY 2012-13 valid instead of AY 2013-14. ITAT noted tax rates remained constant across relevant years, making revenue's objection academic per SC precedent in Excel Industries case, as no revenue loss occurred regardless of claiming year. en-us Fri, 27 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 01 Jul 2025 08:47:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773978 ITAT Delhi allowed the assessee's appeal regarding loss on Amritsar real estate project write-off. Lower authorities incorrectly determined the loss crystallization date as 2009, but ITAT found disputes between parties continued until compromise deed dated 20-7-2012. The loss crystallized in 2012, making the claim in AY 2012-13 valid instead of AY 2013-14. ITAT noted tax rates remained constant across relevant years, making revenue's objection academic per SC precedent in Excel Industries case, as no revenue loss occurred regardless of claiming year. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 27 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773978