https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785498 Denial of deduction under section 54B arose because the assessee invested the sale proceeds in agricultural land registered in the wifes name rather than in the assessees name; the legal effect is that the replacement property requirement for the deduction was not satisfied and the deduction was refused, resulting in dismissal of the assessees grounds. The rationale rests on the absence of proper acquisition by the assessee and the consequent failure to meet the statutory condition for exemption, leading to confirmation of the assessing authoritys order. en-us Wed, 21 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 24 Jan 2026 08:39:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785498 Denial of deduction under section 54B arose because the assessee invested the sale proceeds in agricultural land registered in the wifes name rather than in the assessees name; the legal effect is that the replacement property requirement for the deduction was not satisfied and the deduction was refused, resulting in dismissal of the assessees grounds. The rationale rests on the absence of proper acquisition by the assessee and the consequent failure to meet the statutory condition for exemption, leading to confirmation of the assessing authoritys order. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 21 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785498