<?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 (5) TMI 12 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342274</link>
    <description>ITAT MUMBAI - AT held that the assessee is entitled to full exemption under s.54 where the entire consideration for the new jointly-titled property was paid by the assessee for safety reasons. The AO erred in allowing only 50% exemption and the CIT(A) erred in taxing the entire capital gain, given half the old property belonged to the spouse who paid tax on her share. Decision in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 27 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 05 Sep 2025 10:55:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=467188" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (5) TMI 12 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342274</link>
      <description>ITAT MUMBAI - AT held that the assessee is entitled to full exemption under s.54 where the entire consideration for the new jointly-titled property was paid by the assessee for safety reasons. The AO erred in allowing only 50% exemption and the CIT(A) erred in taxing the entire capital gain, given half the old property belonged to the spouse who paid tax on her share. Decision in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342274</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>