<?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 (6) TMI 1075 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329366</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision to partially allow the appeal regarding the disallowance of exemption claimed under Section 54 of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal agreed with the CIT(A) that the investment eligible for deduction should be restricted to specific amounts for the plot and construction, allowing a total exemption under Section 54. Additionally, the Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision to delete the addition made under Section 40(a)(ia) after verifying the payments and TDS returns, finding no errors in the CIT(A)&#039;s reasoning. Both appeals by the Assessee and the Revenue were dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 03 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 30 Jun 2016 10:48:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=433314" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (6) TMI 1075 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329366</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision to partially allow the appeal regarding the disallowance of exemption claimed under Section 54 of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal agreed with the CIT(A) that the investment eligible for deduction should be restricted to specific amounts for the plot and construction, allowing a total exemption under Section 54. Additionally, the Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision to delete the addition made under Section 40(a)(ia) after verifying the payments and TDS returns, finding no errors in the CIT(A)&#039;s reasoning. Both appeals by the Assessee and the Revenue were dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329366</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>