https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783322 HC dismissed the revenue's appeal and upheld the ITAT order allowing the assessee's set off of short-term capital loss against long-term capital gains for the block period. HC noted that on identical facts, additions in the cases of the assessee's father and brother had been deleted and those orders had attained finality, with no further appeals by the revenue. Applying the rule of consistency in tax matters, HC held the revenue could not take a contrary stand. HC further endorsed the concurrent factual findings of CIT(A) and ITAT that the assessee had substantiated the transactions and quantification of capital loss, and that the set off was correctly allowed. en-us Fri, 28 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 13 Dec 2025 08:28:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783322 HC dismissed the revenue's appeal and upheld the ITAT order allowing the assessee's set off of short-term capital loss against long-term capital gains for the block period. HC noted that on identical facts, additions in the cases of the assessee's father and brother had been deleted and those orders had attained finality, with no further appeals by the revenue. Applying the rule of consistency in tax matters, HC held the revenue could not take a contrary stand. HC further endorsed the concurrent factual findings of CIT(A) and ITAT that the assessee had substantiated the transactions and quantification of capital loss, and that the set off was correctly allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 28 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783322