<?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>2019 (2) TMI 1924 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294936</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decisions, dismissing the Revenue&#039;s appeal. The addition on account of accommodation entry was deleted as the assessee provided sufficient evidence that the transaction was genuine. The addition on account of LTCG was also deleted because the total sale consideration exceeded the stamp duty valuation, and Section 50C was deemed inapplicable to leasehold rights.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 06 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 11 May 2021 08:35:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=643914" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (2) TMI 1924 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294936</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decisions, dismissing the Revenue&#039;s appeal. The addition on account of accommodation entry was deleted as the assessee provided sufficient evidence that the transaction was genuine. The addition on account of LTCG was also deleted because the total sale consideration exceeded the stamp duty valuation, and Section 50C was deemed inapplicable to leasehold rights.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294936</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>