https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777123 ITAT (DEL) allowed the appeal. It held the Revenue's technical objection on the third proviso to s.50C lacked merit and, following precedent, treated the 10% tolerance margin against stamp valuation as retrospective, favouring the assessee. Separately, the Tribunal allowed the s.54EC deduction claimed beyond the original computation because the assessee actually reinvested the capital gains and filed the return under s.139(1); the deduction was not barred and was granted. en-us Wed, 08 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 25 Aug 2025 08:40:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777123 ITAT (DEL) allowed the appeal. It held the Revenue's technical objection on the third proviso to s.50C lacked merit and, following precedent, treated the 10% tolerance margin against stamp valuation as retrospective, favouring the assessee. Separately, the Tribunal allowed the s.54EC deduction claimed beyond the original computation because the assessee actually reinvested the capital gains and filed the return under s.139(1); the deduction was not barred and was granted. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 08 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777123