<?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>2003 (9) TMI 16 - KERALA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11005</link>
    <description>Unquoted shares sold to relatives below market value may attract deemed gift-tax consequences where the factual finding shows consideration far below market value and the claimed financial necessity is not accepted. For valuation of unquoted shares under the Gift-tax Act, absent a specific contrary rule, the yield method is ordinarily the proper basis for a going concern; the break-up method is not the normal governing approach, and reliance on Wealth-tax valuation rules was displaced by gift-tax valuation principles.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 25 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 29 Jul 2009 11:32:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=50024" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (9) TMI 16 - KERALA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11005</link>
      <description>Unquoted shares sold to relatives below market value may attract deemed gift-tax consequences where the factual finding shows consideration far below market value and the claimed financial necessity is not accepted. For valuation of unquoted shares under the Gift-tax Act, absent a specific contrary rule, the yield method is ordinarily the proper basis for a going concern; the break-up method is not the normal governing approach, and reliance on Wealth-tax valuation rules was displaced by gift-tax valuation principles.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 25 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11005</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>