<?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>2004 (2) TMI 35 - RAJASTHAN High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11030</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, determining that the relevant assessment year for taxing the capital gain from the contribution of cut precious stones was 1976-77, not 1977-78. The Tribunal considered the date of transfer as the key factor, leading to the conclusion that the capital gain should be assessed in the preceding year. This decision clarified the tax implications of capital gains on unique contributions and highlighted the importance of accurate assessment year determination in tax matters.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 23 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 29 Jul 2009 19:57:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=50049" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (2) TMI 35 - RAJASTHAN High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11030</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, determining that the relevant assessment year for taxing the capital gain from the contribution of cut precious stones was 1976-77, not 1977-78. The Tribunal considered the date of transfer as the key factor, leading to the conclusion that the capital gain should be assessed in the preceding year. This decision clarified the tax implications of capital gains on unique contributions and highlighted the importance of accurate assessment year determination in tax matters.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11030</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>