<?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 (9) TMI 552 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385784</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision, confirming the application of Section 56(2)(vii)(b)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to the relevant transactions. It rejected the argument that agricultural land should be classified as rural land, denied the claim for enhanced cost deduction under Section 54B, and refused to admit additional evidence. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the additions made by the authorities under the Act.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 11 Sep 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 13 Sep 2019 06:00:45 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=587080" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (9) TMI 552 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385784</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision, confirming the application of Section 56(2)(vii)(b)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to the relevant transactions. It rejected the argument that agricultural land should be classified as rural land, denied the claim for enhanced cost deduction under Section 54B, and refused to admit additional evidence. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the additions made by the authorities under the Act.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 11 Sep 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385784</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>