<?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>2020 (3) TMI 1048 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393904</link>
    <description>The tribunal dismissed both appeals, upholding the CWT(A)&#039;s decision and confirming the AO&#039;s assessment that the urban lands in question did not qualify for exemption under section 2(ea) of the Wealth Tax Act due to lack of evidence of agricultural use. The judgment was delivered on 6th December 2019, marking the end of the legal dispute concerning the taxation of urban lands.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 06 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Mar 2020 11:07:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=608031" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (3) TMI 1048 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393904</link>
      <description>The tribunal dismissed both appeals, upholding the CWT(A)&#039;s decision and confirming the AO&#039;s assessment that the urban lands in question did not qualify for exemption under section 2(ea) of the Wealth Tax Act due to lack of evidence of agricultural use. The judgment was delivered on 6th December 2019, marking the end of the legal dispute concerning the taxation of urban lands.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Wealth-tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393904</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>