<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2009 (6) TMI 121 - ITAT COCHIN</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=62364</link>
    <description>Surplus consideration received on transfer of agricultural land situated beyond notified municipal limits was treated as part of the agricultural transaction and not taxed as separate income; the addition for &quot;on money&quot; was deleted. The dispute on the difference between declared construction cost and the Departmental Valuation Officer&#039;s estimate was not finally resolved on the existing material and was remanded for fresh consideration after giving the assessee an opportunity of hearing. The cash deposit of Rs. 45,000 and the bank credit of Rs. 1,25,000 were not satisfactorily explained, so those additions were sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 29 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 04 Oct 2023 14:10:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=100810" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (6) TMI 121 - ITAT COCHIN</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=62364</link>
      <description>Surplus consideration received on transfer of agricultural land situated beyond notified municipal limits was treated as part of the agricultural transaction and not taxed as separate income; the addition for &quot;on money&quot; was deleted. The dispute on the difference between declared construction cost and the Departmental Valuation Officer&#039;s estimate was not finally resolved on the existing material and was remanded for fresh consideration after giving the assessee an opportunity of hearing. The cash deposit of Rs. 45,000 and the bank credit of Rs. 1,25,000 were not satisfactorily explained, so those additions were sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=62364</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>