Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Urmila Jagdish Mehta Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai)
Related Assessment Year : 2014-15
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Urmila Jagdish Mehta Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) Allotment Date Decides Holding Period: ITAT Mumbai Treats Redeveloped Flat Gains as LTCG, Allows Sec 54 Relief The Mumbai ITAT “F” Bench, comprising Smt. Beena Pillai (JM) & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (AM), allowed the appeal of Mrs. Urmila Jagdish Mehta for AY 2014-15 and held that capital gains arising from sale of a redeveloped residential flat were long-term capital gains, not short-term, thereby deleting the addition of ₹2.11 crore made by the AO and sustained by the CIT(A). The Assessee originally acquired a flat in 1988. Pursuant...
This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.

Author Bio

CA Vijayakumar Shetty qualified in 1994 and in practice since then. Founding partner of Shetty & Co. He is a graduate from St Aloysius College, Mangalore . View Full Profile

My Published Posts

Penny Stock Addition Fails: ITAT Says Suspicion Cannot Replace Evidence Borrowed Satisfaction: ITAT Quashes Penny Stock Additions in Multiple Family Cases Statement Alone Cannot Justify ‘On-Money’ Addition: ITAT Mumbai Genuine ITR Mistake Cannot Lead to Tax on Wrong Income: ITAT Mumbai AO Cannot Reopen on the Same Material Examined in U/s 153C Assessment: ITAT Quashes ₹2.90 Crore Addition View More Published Posts

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Search Post by Date
June 2026
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930