<?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>2007 (1) TMI 90 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3459</link>
    <description>The High Court determined that the income from the sale of plots constituted capital gain rather than business income. The court emphasized that the respondent&#039;s actions did not amount to regular trading activity and that the land was originally gifted, not acquired for resale purposes. Additionally, the court found that the appeal filed by the Revenue was not maintainable under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act due to the monetary limits set by the CBDT circular. As a result, all appeals were dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 Jan 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 28 Jul 2008 17:05:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=42811" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (1) TMI 90 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3459</link>
      <description>The High Court determined that the income from the sale of plots constituted capital gain rather than business income. The court emphasized that the respondent&#039;s actions did not amount to regular trading activity and that the land was originally gifted, not acquired for resale purposes. Additionally, the court found that the appeal filed by the Revenue was not maintainable under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act due to the monetary limits set by the CBDT circular. As a result, all appeals were dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 Jan 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3459</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>