<?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>2018 (9) TMI 1027 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367291</link>
    <description>The court held that the successor company, not the firm, should bear the capital gains tax liability due to non-compliance with the conditions of Section 47(xiii)(b). The allotment of shares should be completed within the relevant previous year of succession. Both appeals were disposed of without costs, and the substantial question of law was answered in favor of the Revenue and against the Assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 23 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 01 Oct 2018 12:30:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=534799" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (9) TMI 1027 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367291</link>
      <description>The court held that the successor company, not the firm, should bear the capital gains tax liability due to non-compliance with the conditions of Section 47(xiii)(b). The allotment of shares should be completed within the relevant previous year of succession. Both appeals were disposed of without costs, and the substantial question of law was answered in favor of the Revenue and against the Assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367291</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>