<?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 (3) TMI 269 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325085</link>
    <description>The ITAT upheld the AO&#039;s decision to classify the compensation as &#039;capital gains&#039;, determine the number of fruit-bearing trees as 99 based on Jamabandi records, and calculate the cost of acquisition and improvement at Rs. 2,500 per tree. The ITAT emphasized adherence to the provisions of the Income Tax Act in computing capital gains, dismissing the appeals.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 19 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 10 Mar 2016 08:17:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=419577" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (3) TMI 269 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325085</link>
      <description>The ITAT upheld the AO&#039;s decision to classify the compensation as &#039;capital gains&#039;, determine the number of fruit-bearing trees as 99 based on Jamabandi records, and calculate the cost of acquisition and improvement at Rs. 2,500 per tree. The ITAT emphasized adherence to the provisions of the Income Tax Act in computing capital gains, dismissing the appeals.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325085</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>