<?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>1998 (1) TMI 65 - DELHI High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17197</link>
    <description>The High Court held that the compensation received by the assessee for vacating the premises was not taxable as capital gains due to the absence of a cost of acquisition. The issue of potential taxation as casual income was not addressed in this reference but was left open for future consideration. The court ruled in favor of the assessee on the tax liability for the compensation received.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 Sep 2009 17:40:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=56197" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (1) TMI 65 - DELHI High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17197</link>
      <description>The High Court held that the compensation received by the assessee for vacating the premises was not taxable as capital gains due to the absence of a cost of acquisition. The issue of potential taxation as casual income was not addressed in this reference but was left open for future consideration. The court ruled in favor of the assessee on the tax liability for the compensation received.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17197</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>