<?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>2013 (1) TMI 1011 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294121</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld that the assessee was entitled to 100% deduction under section 54F of the Income Tax Act, despite the property being registered in joint names, as the entire consideration was paid by the assessee. Additionally, the Tribunal ruled that the benefit of indexation should be calculated from 01.04.1981, the year the previous owner acquired the property. Consequently, the Revenue&#039;s appeal was dismissed, affirming the Ld. CIT(A)&#039;s decision on both issues.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 22 Mar 2021 11:18:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=639513" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (1) TMI 1011 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294121</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld that the assessee was entitled to 100% deduction under section 54F of the Income Tax Act, despite the property being registered in joint names, as the entire consideration was paid by the assessee. Additionally, the Tribunal ruled that the benefit of indexation should be calculated from 01.04.1981, the year the previous owner acquired the property. Consequently, the Revenue&#039;s appeal was dismissed, affirming the Ld. CIT(A)&#039;s decision on both issues.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294121</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>