<?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 (8) TMI 680 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78429</link>
    <description>The court ruled in favor of the assessee on both issues. It held that the entire profit from the sale of a composite asset should not be treated as short-term capital gains, distinguishing between depreciable and non-depreciable assets. Additionally, the assessee was entitled to exemption under section 54EC of the Income-tax Act, as the land involved was not depreciable. The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the decision granting the exemption, based on relevant provisions of the Act and prior court rulings.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 31 Aug 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 16 Nov 2010 10:39:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=116552" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (8) TMI 680 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78429</link>
      <description>The court ruled in favor of the assessee on both issues. It held that the entire profit from the sale of a composite asset should not be treated as short-term capital gains, distinguishing between depreciable and non-depreciable assets. Additionally, the assessee was entitled to exemption under section 54EC of the Income-tax Act, as the land involved was not depreciable. The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the decision granting the exemption, based on relevant provisions of the Act and prior court rulings.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 31 Aug 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78429</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>