<?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>1995 (10) TMI 5 - GUJARAT High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14319</link>
    <description>Under Chapter XX-C of the Income-tax Act, 1961, apparent consideration is the consideration stated in the transfer agreement, and purchaser-borne stamp duty, registration fee and similar conveyancing expenses cannot be deducted from it for purposes of section 269UA(b) and the payment mechanism under section 269UF. The Court also held that any deferred part of the consideration must be discounted from the date of the agreement for transfer, as expressly required by section 269UA(b), and not from a later sale deed or registration date. The computation was therefore upheld on the deferred consideration issue, while the deduction for conveyancing s was disallowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 19 Oct 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Jul 2009 12:07:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=53319" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1995 (10) TMI 5 - GUJARAT High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14319</link>
      <description>Under Chapter XX-C of the Income-tax Act, 1961, apparent consideration is the consideration stated in the transfer agreement, and purchaser-borne stamp duty, registration fee and similar conveyancing expenses cannot be deducted from it for purposes of section 269UA(b) and the payment mechanism under section 269UF. The Court also held that any deferred part of the consideration must be discounted from the date of the agreement for transfer, as expressly required by section 269UA(b), and not from a later sale deed or registration date. The computation was therefore upheld on the deferred consideration issue, while the deduction for conveyancing s was disallowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Oct 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14319</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>