<?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 (7) TMI 171 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3709</link>
    <description>The court ruled that a transfer of shares as part of a family arrangement to prevent family disputes does not attract Capital Gains Tax. The Tribunal found the realignment of shareholdings was necessary for effective company control and family harmony, aligning with established legal principles on family arrangements. The decision emphasized fairness, voluntariness, and the family&#039;s best interests, dismissing appeals and confirming no capital gains tax liability.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 06 Jul 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 27 Jul 2008 11:54:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=43057" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (7) TMI 171 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3709</link>
      <description>The court ruled that a transfer of shares as part of a family arrangement to prevent family disputes does not attract Capital Gains Tax. The Tribunal found the realignment of shareholdings was necessary for effective company control and family harmony, aligning with established legal principles on family arrangements. The decision emphasized fairness, voluntariness, and the family&#039;s best interests, dismissing appeals and confirming no capital gains tax liability.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Jul 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3709</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>