<?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 (7) TMI 22 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329424</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT (A)&#039;s decision, determining that the cost of acquisition for the property acquired in lieu of tenancy rights should be based on the market value at the time of acquisition. The Tribunal dismissed the revenue&#039;s appeal for the assessment year 2008-09, affirming the order that the entire sale value should not be considered as capital gain. The decision aligned with legal provisions and past judgments, with no legal flaws identified.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 Jun 2016 17:51:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=433464" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (7) TMI 22 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329424</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT (A)&#039;s decision, determining that the cost of acquisition for the property acquired in lieu of tenancy rights should be based on the market value at the time of acquisition. The Tribunal dismissed the revenue&#039;s appeal for the assessment year 2008-09, affirming the order that the entire sale value should not be considered as capital gain. The decision aligned with legal provisions and past judgments, with no legal flaws identified.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329424</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>