<?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 (11) TMI 179 - ITAT, Bangalore</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=218164</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, affirming the CIT(A)&#039;s ruling that the agricultural land sale did not constitute a capital asset under section 2(14)(iii) of the Income Tax Act. The decision highlighted the necessity of addressing the grounds of dispute raised in the appeal and upheld the judgment based on pertinent legal provisions and precedents.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 25 May 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 06 Nov 2012 07:30:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=191537" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (11) TMI 179 - ITAT, Bangalore</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=218164</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, affirming the CIT(A)&#039;s ruling that the agricultural land sale did not constitute a capital asset under section 2(14)(iii) of the Income Tax Act. The decision highlighted the necessity of addressing the grounds of dispute raised in the appeal and upheld the judgment based on pertinent legal provisions and precedents.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 May 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=218164</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>