<?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>1980 (3) TMI 136 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67777</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, holding that the value of 80 tolas of gold ornaments should be excluded from the wealth-tax assessments for the years 1976-77 and 1977-78. The Tribunal accepted the affidavit indicating that the ornaments were not owned by the assessee but were intended for the benefit of her sons. Despite discrepancies in statements, the Tribunal found the claim plausible and directed the exclusion of the ornaments from assessments.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 25 Mar 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 Mar 2011 15:24:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=106212" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1980 (3) TMI 136 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67777</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, holding that the value of 80 tolas of gold ornaments should be excluded from the wealth-tax assessments for the years 1976-77 and 1977-78. The Tribunal accepted the affidavit indicating that the ornaments were not owned by the assessee but were intended for the benefit of her sons. Despite discrepancies in statements, the Tribunal found the claim plausible and directed the exclusion of the ornaments from assessments.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Wealth-tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Mar 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67777</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>