Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Sadhana Annasabeh Sonwane Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai)
Related Assessment Year : 2013-14
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sadhana Annasabeh Sonwane Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai) Money Paid, Flat Allotted, Rights Acquired – ITAT: 54F Cannot Be Denied Just for Late Registration- Substance Over Form: Investment Matters, Not Stamp Paper Date In this case, Assessee sold a plot of land at Nashik on 18.02.2013 for ₹70 lakhs & claimed deduction u/s 54F by reinvesting the sale proceeds in a residential flat at Mumbai for a consideration of ₹76,65,000. While scrutinizing the return, AO noted that the registered agreement for purchase of the flat was executed on 21.06.2017. Since Section 54F(1) requires that the new reside...
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Your email address will not be published.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