https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=57410 The Appellate Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeal, agreeing with the Commissioner (Appeals) that the excess amount received by the assessee upon retirement did not constitute capital gains. The Tribunal held that the retirement transaction did not amount to a 'transfer' as the assessee received only what was due to her, without relinquishing her rights in the firm's assets. This case underscores the differing interpretations by the Bombay High Court and the Calcutta High Court regarding retirement transactions involving partners and their tax implications under the Income-tax Act. en-us Tue, 11 Dec 1984 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 10 Dec 2010 10:27:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=57410 The Appellate Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeal, agreeing with the Commissioner (Appeals) that the excess amount received by the assessee upon retirement did not constitute capital gains. The Tribunal held that the retirement transaction did not amount to a 'transfer' as the assessee received only what was due to her, without relinquishing her rights in the firm's assets. This case underscores the differing interpretations by the Bombay High Court and the Calcutta High Court regarding retirement transactions involving partners and their tax implications under the Income-tax Act. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 11 Dec 1984 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=57410