<?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 (4) TMI 115 - ITAT JODHPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245617</link>
    <description>The Tribunal affirmed the CIT(A)&#039;s findings, upholding the treatment of trading income as Long Term Capital Gains (LTCG) for the assessment year 2005-06. The revenue&#039;s appeal challenging the LTCG claimed by the assessee was dismissed due to lack of substantial evidence to refute the authenticity of the share transactions. The decision favored the assessee, emphasizing the importance of concrete evidence in tax disputes.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Oct 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 03 Apr 2014 08:52:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=350934" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (4) TMI 115 - ITAT JODHPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245617</link>
      <description>The Tribunal affirmed the CIT(A)&#039;s findings, upholding the treatment of trading income as Long Term Capital Gains (LTCG) for the assessment year 2005-06. The revenue&#039;s appeal challenging the LTCG claimed by the assessee was dismissed due to lack of substantial evidence to refute the authenticity of the share transactions. The decision favored the assessee, emphasizing the importance of concrete evidence in tax disputes.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Oct 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245617</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>