<?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>1996 (5) TMI 113 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67551</link>
    <description>The Tribunal determined the annual letting value of the property at Rs. 1,96,581, rejecting the deduction claimed for damages recovered by FCI. The Tribunal held that the damages were an application of income, not a permissible deduction under section 24. Alternative claims for vacancy allowance and unrealized rent were also denied. The Assessing Officer&#039;s computation of income was upheld, setting aside the CIT(A)&#039;s decision. The revenue&#039;s appeal was allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 May 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Mar 2011 12:29:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=105986" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (5) TMI 113 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67551</link>
      <description>The Tribunal determined the annual letting value of the property at Rs. 1,96,581, rejecting the deduction claimed for damages recovered by FCI. The Tribunal held that the damages were an application of income, not a permissible deduction under section 24. Alternative claims for vacancy allowance and unrealized rent were also denied. The Assessing Officer&#039;s computation of income was upheld, setting aside the CIT(A)&#039;s decision. The revenue&#039;s appeal was allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 May 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67551</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>