<?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>2017 (2) TMI 588 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338888</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, ruling that Section 50C of the I.T. Act, 1961, was not applicable to the sale of &quot;Arakshan Patra&quot; as it did not qualify as land or building. Consequently, the addition of Rs. 6,05,980/- for short-term capital gain was deleted. The Tribunal noted the procedural lapse by the Assessing Officer in not referring the valuation to a Valuation Officer, but this issue became secondary due to the primary finding on the inapplicability of Section 50C. The appeal was allowed on 10-02-2017.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2017 18:07:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=458541" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (2) TMI 588 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338888</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, ruling that Section 50C of the I.T. Act, 1961, was not applicable to the sale of &quot;Arakshan Patra&quot; as it did not qualify as land or building. Consequently, the addition of Rs. 6,05,980/- for short-term capital gain was deleted. The Tribunal noted the procedural lapse by the Assessing Officer in not referring the valuation to a Valuation Officer, but this issue became secondary due to the primary finding on the inapplicability of Section 50C. The appeal was allowed on 10-02-2017.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338888</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>