<?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>2015 (11) TMI 1612 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188623</link>
    <description>Capital gains tax relief under section 45 was discussed in relation to whether the claim should be assessed on actual figures rather than projected figures. The respondents were directed to produce supporting materials, and the matter was renotified for a later date. No final adjudication was made on the grievance, so the document records only an interim procedural step and the underlying issue remained unresolved.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 27 Nov 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 Dec 2016 16:33:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=451092" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (11) TMI 1612 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188623</link>
      <description>Capital gains tax relief under section 45 was discussed in relation to whether the claim should be assessed on actual figures rather than projected figures. The respondents were directed to produce supporting materials, and the matter was renotified for a later date. No final adjudication was made on the grievance, so the document records only an interim procedural step and the underlying issue remained unresolved.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Nov 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188623</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>