<?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>2006 (6) TMI 256 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118176</link>
    <description>The ITAT overturned the CIT(A)&#039;s disallowances, allowing the assessee&#039;s appeal. It found no restriction on claiming a deduction for the same property under section 54F, provided the conditions are met within the specified timeframe. Additionally, the ITAT accepted the evidence for the interest payment, allowing the deduction against rental income.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 14 Jun 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 13 Mar 2024 13:13:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=155173" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (6) TMI 256 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118176</link>
      <description>The ITAT overturned the CIT(A)&#039;s disallowances, allowing the assessee&#039;s appeal. It found no restriction on claiming a deduction for the same property under section 54F, provided the conditions are met within the specified timeframe. Additionally, the ITAT accepted the evidence for the interest payment, allowing the deduction against rental income.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 14 Jun 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118176</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>