<?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 (11) TMI 773 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401018</link>
    <description>The ITAT Mumbai allowed the appeal, quashing the order passed under section 263 of the Income Tax Act. The decision was based on factual details, compliance with section 54 requirements, and legal precedents supporting the deduction claim. The judgment highlighted the significance of proper documentation, property transaction timelines, and adherence to statutory provisions in income tax assessments.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 23 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Nov 2020 10:19:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=628563" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (11) TMI 773 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401018</link>
      <description>The ITAT Mumbai allowed the appeal, quashing the order passed under section 263 of the Income Tax Act. The decision was based on factual details, compliance with section 54 requirements, and legal precedents supporting the deduction claim. The judgment highlighted the significance of proper documentation, property transaction timelines, and adherence to statutory provisions in income tax assessments.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401018</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>