<?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 (12) TMI 982 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=402183</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, remitting the issue back to the Assessing Officer to verify evidence of the new residential property in Chicago and decide the exemption claim under Section 54F. Compliance with Section 54(2) and depositing unutilized capital gains in the Capital Gains Account Scheme before the due date under Section 139(1) was emphasized.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 Dec 2020 17:06:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=631253" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (12) TMI 982 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=402183</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, remitting the issue back to the Assessing Officer to verify evidence of the new residential property in Chicago and decide the exemption claim under Section 54F. Compliance with Section 54(2) and depositing unutilized capital gains in the Capital Gains Account Scheme before the due date under Section 139(1) was emphasized.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=402183</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>