<?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>2012 (8) TMI 178 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=215493</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appellant&#039;s appeal, affirming the disallowance of exemption under section 54B of the Income Tax Act. The appellant failed to provide substantial evidence of agricultural activities on the land in the two years preceding the sale, leading to the rejection of the exemption claim. The Tribunal upheld the decisions of the lower authorities, emphasizing the necessity of meeting statutory conditions for claiming exemptions under the Act and requiring concrete evidence to support such claims.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 14 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Aug 2012 17:44:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=188879" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (8) TMI 178 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=215493</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appellant&#039;s appeal, affirming the disallowance of exemption under section 54B of the Income Tax Act. The appellant failed to provide substantial evidence of agricultural activities on the land in the two years preceding the sale, leading to the rejection of the exemption claim. The Tribunal upheld the decisions of the lower authorities, emphasizing the necessity of meeting statutory conditions for claiming exemptions under the Act and requiring concrete evidence to support such claims.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 14 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=215493</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>