<?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 480 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327499</link>
    <description>In computing capital gains on inherited property, indexation follows the holding period of the previous owner, so the cost inflation benefit may run from the base year linked to that owner&#039;s acquisition and the fair market value as on 1 April 1981 may be adopted where applicable. A reference to the Departmental Valuation Officer for determining that fair market value was upheld because it was made pursuant to appellate directions, at the assessee&#039;s instance, and was not effectively challenged. Interest under sections 234A and 234B had to be recomputed after giving credit for amounts lying under provisional attachment, as such sums were available towards the tax demand.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 13 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 12 May 2016 01:23:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=427873" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (5) TMI 480 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327499</link>
      <description>In computing capital gains on inherited property, indexation follows the holding period of the previous owner, so the cost inflation benefit may run from the base year linked to that owner&#039;s acquisition and the fair market value as on 1 April 1981 may be adopted where applicable. A reference to the Departmental Valuation Officer for determining that fair market value was upheld because it was made pursuant to appellate directions, at the assessee&#039;s instance, and was not effectively challenged. Interest under sections 234A and 234B had to be recomputed after giving credit for amounts lying under provisional attachment, as such sums were available towards the tax demand.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327499</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>