<?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 (7) TMI 370 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345258</link>
    <description>The Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the decision of the Income Tax Authorities that the property was not &#039;stock in trade&#039; but an investment, resulting in tax implications for the Assessee. The judgment emphasized the necessity of providing adequate evidence to support the classification of property for tax purposes and highlighted the importance of satisfying authorities regarding the genuineness of business activities and transactions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 04 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 13 Dec 2017 10:53:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=480880" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (7) TMI 370 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345258</link>
      <description>The Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the decision of the Income Tax Authorities that the property was not &#039;stock in trade&#039; but an investment, resulting in tax implications for the Assessee. The judgment emphasized the necessity of providing adequate evidence to support the classification of property for tax purposes and highlighted the importance of satisfying authorities regarding the genuineness of business activities and transactions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 04 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345258</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>