<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2025 (9) TMI 1646 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779157</link>
    <description>ITAT MUMBAI - AT allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal, holding that a current-year short-term capital loss under s.111A may be set off against current-year short-term capital gains even though differing tax rates apply. Where the Act does not prescribe a specific mode of set-off, the assessee may elect the most beneficial set-off, and the CIT(A) was incorrect to deny the set-off. The tribunal followed the HC precedent endorsing taxpayer choice in such situations.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 20 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Sep 2025 08:30:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=855401" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (9) TMI 1646 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779157</link>
      <description>ITAT MUMBAI - AT allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal, holding that a current-year short-term capital loss under s.111A may be set off against current-year short-term capital gains even though differing tax rates apply. Where the Act does not prescribe a specific mode of set-off, the assessee may elect the most beneficial set-off, and the CIT(A) was incorrect to deny the set-off. The tribunal followed the HC precedent endorsing taxpayer choice in such situations.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 20 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779157</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>