<?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>2016 (1) TMI 711 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270919</link>
    <description>The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision to allow exemption u/s 54F for one residential unit and dismissed the revenue&#039;s appeal. The ITAT concluded that the exemption under sections 54 and 54F was intended for investment in one single residential house only, directing the AO to allow the exemption in respect of one residential unit.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 29 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 20 Jan 2016 10:46:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=413646" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (1) TMI 711 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270919</link>
      <description>The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision to allow exemption u/s 54F for one residential unit and dismissed the revenue&#039;s appeal. The ITAT concluded that the exemption under sections 54 and 54F was intended for investment in one single residential house only, directing the AO to allow the exemption in respect of one residential unit.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270919</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>