<?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>2014 (3) TMI 355 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244900</link>
    <description>The tribunal upheld the department&#039;s addition of Rs.1,52,90,250 as undisclosed income, directing verification for any excess addition. The Fair Market Value (FMV) of the property issue was remitted back to the Assessing Officer for proper inquiry. The tribunal allowed the deduction under Section 54F for contiguous residential flats, emphasizing the importance of corroborative evidence and proper valuation procedures in tax assessments.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 21 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 12 Mar 2014 15:54:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=348315" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (3) TMI 355 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244900</link>
      <description>The tribunal upheld the department&#039;s addition of Rs.1,52,90,250 as undisclosed income, directing verification for any excess addition. The Fair Market Value (FMV) of the property issue was remitted back to the Assessing Officer for proper inquiry. The tribunal allowed the deduction under Section 54F for contiguous residential flats, emphasizing the importance of corroborative evidence and proper valuation procedures in tax assessments.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244900</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>