<?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 (9) TMI 1054 - ITAT AMRITSAR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175509</link>
    <description>A development arrangement supported by allied resolutions and an irrevocable power of attorney was treated as a deemed transfer because the developer obtained control, development, mortgage, sale and enjoyment rights over the property. On that basis, capital gains were held taxable in the year of the arrangement, and both amounts received and amounts accrued under the deal formed part of the consideration. The challenge to reassessment under section 148 failed, as no infirmity was found in the assumption of jurisdiction. The claim for deduction under section 54F was denied for failure to satisfy the statutory conditions. The additions and reassessment action were sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 12 Sep 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 28 Nov 2016 13:57:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=406372" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (9) TMI 1054 - ITAT AMRITSAR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175509</link>
      <description>A development arrangement supported by allied resolutions and an irrevocable power of attorney was treated as a deemed transfer because the developer obtained control, development, mortgage, sale and enjoyment rights over the property. On that basis, capital gains were held taxable in the year of the arrangement, and both amounts received and amounts accrued under the deal formed part of the consideration. The challenge to reassessment under section 148 failed, as no infirmity was found in the assumption of jurisdiction. The claim for deduction under section 54F was denied for failure to satisfy the statutory conditions. The additions and reassessment action were sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 12 Sep 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175509</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>