<?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 (12) TMI 741 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352472</link>
    <description>The ITAT dismissed the appeal, upholding the decisions of the lower authorities. It concluded that the rural land sold by the assessee fell within the specified distance from the municipal limit, making it liable for long-term capital gains tax. The ITAT found no merit in the appeal and affirmed the order of the CIT(A), clarifying the interpretation of relevant provisions of the Income Tax Act on the classification of agricultural land for capital gains tax purposes.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 15 Dec 2017 08:38:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=499844" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (12) TMI 741 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352472</link>
      <description>The ITAT dismissed the appeal, upholding the decisions of the lower authorities. It concluded that the rural land sold by the assessee fell within the specified distance from the municipal limit, making it liable for long-term capital gains tax. The ITAT found no merit in the appeal and affirmed the order of the CIT(A), clarifying the interpretation of relevant provisions of the Income Tax Act on the classification of agricultural land for capital gains tax purposes.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352472</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>