<?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>1999 (9) TMI 83 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15867</link>
    <description>Where an agreement for transfer defers part of the sale consideration beyond the date of the agreement, section 269UA(b) requires that deferred amount to be discounted for determining the apparent consideration under Chapter XX-C. The statutory scheme allows the Central Government to purchase the property only for the apparent consideration, and the timing of actual payment by the Government does not alter the discounting exercise. The analysis follows earlier decisions upholding discounting of deferred consideration, and the challenge to the constitutional validity of Chapter XX-C was not entertained in view of binding Supreme Court authority. The writ petition was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 09 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 29 Aug 2009 16:01:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=54867" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (9) TMI 83 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15867</link>
      <description>Where an agreement for transfer defers part of the sale consideration beyond the date of the agreement, section 269UA(b) requires that deferred amount to be discounted for determining the apparent consideration under Chapter XX-C. The statutory scheme allows the Central Government to purchase the property only for the apparent consideration, and the timing of actual payment by the Government does not alter the discounting exercise. The analysis follows earlier decisions upholding discounting of deferred consideration, and the challenge to the constitutional validity of Chapter XX-C was not entertained in view of binding Supreme Court authority. The writ petition was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15867</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>