<?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>2013 (11) TMI 1265 - ITAT PUNE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240088</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the decision that the land in question was a capital asset within the meaning of the Income-tax Act and that the profits from its sale should be treated as capital gains, not business income. The Tribunal dismissed both the appeals, affirming the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)&#039;s findings that the land was held as an investment and not for trading purposes, thus subject to capital gains taxation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 31 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 25 Nov 2013 12:11:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=337014" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (11) TMI 1265 - ITAT PUNE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240088</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the decision that the land in question was a capital asset within the meaning of the Income-tax Act and that the profits from its sale should be treated as capital gains, not business income. The Tribunal dismissed both the appeals, affirming the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)&#039;s findings that the land was held as an investment and not for trading purposes, thus subject to capital gains taxation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 31 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240088</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>