<?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>2019 (4) TMI 1510 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379066</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part, determining that the indexed cost of acquisition should be computed from the year the asset was held by the assessee, granting the benefit of indexation from FY 1981-82. However, the exemption under Section 54 was disallowed as acquiring tenancy rights did not meet the requirements for deduction, leading to the dismissal of ground No. 2.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 23 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 26 Apr 2019 12:07:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=568577" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (4) TMI 1510 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379066</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part, determining that the indexed cost of acquisition should be computed from the year the asset was held by the assessee, granting the benefit of indexation from FY 1981-82. However, the exemption under Section 54 was disallowed as acquiring tenancy rights did not meet the requirements for deduction, leading to the dismissal of ground No. 2.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379066</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>