https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774171 The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, upholding the CIT(A)'s order that deleted the addition of Rs. 6.9 crores as income from other sources, finding it constituted double taxation since the amount was already considered in capital gains computation. The Tribunal accepted the capital loss of Rs. 3,00,97,077/- arising from surrender of flat rights, holding that provisional booking created transferable rights in immovable property constituting a capital asset. The court established that the same income cannot be taxed under different heads and emphasized correct classification based on transaction nature. en-us Fri, 30 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 04 Jul 2025 08:38:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774171 The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, upholding the CIT(A)'s order that deleted the addition of Rs. 6.9 crores as income from other sources, finding it constituted double taxation since the amount was already considered in capital gains computation. The Tribunal accepted the capital loss of Rs. 3,00,97,077/- arising from surrender of flat rights, holding that provisional booking created transferable rights in immovable property constituting a capital asset. The court established that the same income cannot be taxed under different heads and emphasized correct classification based on transaction nature. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 30 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774171