<?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 (4) TMI 1052 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326938</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, emphasizing that section 50C applies only to land or building transfers and not to all capital assets. The detailed analysis of relevant case law clarified that compensation received for relinquishing rights in property transactions does not fall under section 50C. Therefore, the addition of Rs. 12,92,568 was deemed inappropriate, leading to the allowance of the assessee&#039;s appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 17 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 28 Apr 2016 10:07:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=425871" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (4) TMI 1052 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326938</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, emphasizing that section 50C applies only to land or building transfers and not to all capital assets. The detailed analysis of relevant case law clarified that compensation received for relinquishing rights in property transactions does not fall under section 50C. Therefore, the addition of Rs. 12,92,568 was deemed inappropriate, leading to the allowance of the assessee&#039;s appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 17 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326938</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>