<?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 (10) TMI 618 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206301</link>
    <description>Issue concerns computation of long-term capital gains on transfer of immovable property where sale agreement predates a subsequently enacted valuation provision. The tribunal applied non-retroactivity, holding the later valuation provision inapplicable to the pre-existing agreement and accepted that final registration fulfilled a prior contractual obligation, with no suppression of consideration. The tribunal allowed payments made to competing claimants to clear encumbrances and permitted a reasonable estimate for vacation, litigation and broker expenses (quantified at Rs. 8 lakhs) to reduce capital gains. Indexation was allowed by including period of prior owner under succession principles; cost adoption based on registrar certification was upheld against assessees&#039; challenge.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 21 Oct 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 Jan 2026 17:30:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=179796" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (10) TMI 618 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206301</link>
      <description>Issue concerns computation of long-term capital gains on transfer of immovable property where sale agreement predates a subsequently enacted valuation provision. The tribunal applied non-retroactivity, holding the later valuation provision inapplicable to the pre-existing agreement and accepted that final registration fulfilled a prior contractual obligation, with no suppression of consideration. The tribunal allowed payments made to competing claimants to clear encumbrances and permitted a reasonable estimate for vacation, litigation and broker expenses (quantified at Rs. 8 lakhs) to reduce capital gains. Indexation was allowed by including period of prior owner under succession principles; cost adoption based on registrar certification was upheld against assessees&#039; challenge.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Oct 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206301</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>