<?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>1984 (7) TMI 169 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67877</link>
    <description>Withdrawals by the deceased that were supported by account details and shown to meet family and marriage expenses were not treated as deemed gifts for estate duty purposes. Because the record established identifiable expenditure on different dates rather than gratuitous transfers, the deeming provision did not apply. The addition based on deemed gifts was therefore unsustainable, and the deletion of the impugned addition was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 27 Jul 1984 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 Mar 2011 11:26:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=106312" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1984 (7) TMI 169 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67877</link>
      <description>Withdrawals by the deceased that were supported by account details and shown to meet family and marriage expenses were not treated as deemed gifts for estate duty purposes. Because the record established identifiable expenditure on different dates rather than gratuitous transfers, the deeming provision did not apply. The addition based on deemed gifts was therefore unsustainable, and the deletion of the impugned addition was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Jul 1984 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67877</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>