<?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 (5) TMI 429 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327448</link>
    <description>The ITAT dismissed the revenue&#039;s appeal, partially allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal and cross-objection, and directed the deletion of the penalty imposed. The decision was based on the ownership evidence from the agreement of sale deed and the injunction obtained, along with the justification for the encumbrance compensation deduction as a necessary expense for the sale of the capital asset.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 31 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 09 May 2016 20:11:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=427746" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (5) TMI 429 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327448</link>
      <description>The ITAT dismissed the revenue&#039;s appeal, partially allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal and cross-objection, and directed the deletion of the penalty imposed. The decision was based on the ownership evidence from the agreement of sale deed and the injunction obtained, along with the justification for the encumbrance compensation deduction as a necessary expense for the sale of the capital asset.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 31 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327448</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>