<?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>2015 (8) TMI 1093 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263176</link>
    <description>Addition on account of long-term capital gain could not be deleted without proper consideration of the assessee&#039;s additional evidence, as the record did not show lawful admission and examination of that material. The assessee had not produced the original sale agreement before the Assessing Officer and had not disclosed the capital gain in the return or revised return. Given the factual about the date of acquisition, possession, cost of acquisition and indexed cost of improvement, and in view of the first appellate authority&#039;s coterminous powers, the matter required re-examination on a proper evidentiary footing. The issue was remitted to the Assessing Officer for de novo adjudication after reasonable opportunity of hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 11 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 28 Aug 2015 07:48:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=395048" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (8) TMI 1093 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263176</link>
      <description>Addition on account of long-term capital gain could not be deleted without proper consideration of the assessee&#039;s additional evidence, as the record did not show lawful admission and examination of that material. The assessee had not produced the original sale agreement before the Assessing Officer and had not disclosed the capital gain in the return or revised return. Given the factual about the date of acquisition, possession, cost of acquisition and indexed cost of improvement, and in view of the first appellate authority&#039;s coterminous powers, the matter required re-examination on a proper evidentiary footing. The issue was remitted to the Assessing Officer for de novo adjudication after reasonable opportunity of hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 11 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263176</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>