<?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>2010 (1) TMI 703 - ITAT, Bangalore</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206805</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, ruling in favor of the assessee. The assessee was deemed entitled to deduction under Section 54F for the apartment in Sobha Daisy, treated as a new asset. The purchase of the Silver Oak apartment did not meet the exemption criteria. Additionally, the investment made up to the date of filing the return under Section 139(4) was considered for the exemption. The decision was pronounced on 29.1.2010.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 Jan 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 22 Oct 2011 14:47:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=180288" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (1) TMI 703 - ITAT, Bangalore</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206805</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, ruling in favor of the assessee. The assessee was deemed entitled to deduction under Section 54F for the apartment in Sobha Daisy, treated as a new asset. The purchase of the Silver Oak apartment did not meet the exemption criteria. Additionally, the investment made up to the date of filing the return under Section 139(4) was considered for the exemption. The decision was pronounced on 29.1.2010.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Jan 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206805</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>