<?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>2021 (1) TMI 222 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=402630</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed both the revenue&#039;s appeal and the assessee&#039;s cross objection, upholding the CIT(A)&#039;s decision that the profit on the sale of land should not be treated as business income. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of assessing the intention and nature of income, highlighting the need for a thorough examination of facts and evidence in determining income classification, particularly in cases involving asset sales like land.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 16 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 08 Jan 2021 10:19:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=632435" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (1) TMI 222 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=402630</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed both the revenue&#039;s appeal and the assessee&#039;s cross objection, upholding the CIT(A)&#039;s decision that the profit on the sale of land should not be treated as business income. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of assessing the intention and nature of income, highlighting the need for a thorough examination of facts and evidence in determining income classification, particularly in cases involving asset sales like land.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 16 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=402630</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>