<?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>2011 (10) TMI 467 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212401</link>
    <description>The court upheld the addition of the difference amount between the agreement of sale and sale deed in the assessment. It emphasized the importance of accurate documentation in property transactions and rejected claims that discrepancies were solely for obtaining a bank loan. The court found no evidence to support the appellant&#039;s arguments and affirmed the authorities&#039; decision to add the disparity amount to reflect the actual transaction value. The appeal was dismissed as no substantial legal question arose, and interference was unwarranted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 24 Oct 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 May 2012 13:01:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=185812" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (10) TMI 467 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212401</link>
      <description>The court upheld the addition of the difference amount between the agreement of sale and sale deed in the assessment. It emphasized the importance of accurate documentation in property transactions and rejected claims that discrepancies were solely for obtaining a bank loan. The court found no evidence to support the appellant&#039;s arguments and affirmed the authorities&#039; decision to add the disparity amount to reflect the actual transaction value. The appeal was dismissed as no substantial legal question arose, and interference was unwarranted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 24 Oct 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212401</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>