<?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 (10) TMI 1000 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349845</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled that the surplus arising from the sale of the factory building should be treated as Short Term Capital Gain, not income from other sources. It held that the property was a capital asset, not used for business, and therefore not subject to depreciation. The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)&#039;s decision and directed the Assessing Officer to recalculate the assessee&#039;s total income accordingly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 23 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Oct 2017 08:37:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=493524" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (10) TMI 1000 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349845</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled that the surplus arising from the sale of the factory building should be treated as Short Term Capital Gain, not income from other sources. It held that the property was a capital asset, not used for business, and therefore not subject to depreciation. The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)&#039;s decision and directed the Assessing Officer to recalculate the assessee&#039;s total income accordingly.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349845</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>