<?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 (9) TMI 958 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=412613</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision on the taxation of 2/3 share of land under capital gains and allowed the deduction of development charges and premium FSI charges as cost of improvement. The Tribunal deleted the additions made by the AO for unexplained bank deposits for both A.Y. 2013-14 and A.Y. 2014-15, finding the assessee&#039;s explanations satisfactory. The appeals of the revenue were dismissed, and the cross appeals of the assessee were allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 17 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 Sep 2021 08:12:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=656471" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (9) TMI 958 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=412613</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision on the taxation of 2/3 share of land under capital gains and allowed the deduction of development charges and premium FSI charges as cost of improvement. The Tribunal deleted the additions made by the AO for unexplained bank deposits for both A.Y. 2013-14 and A.Y. 2014-15, finding the assessee&#039;s explanations satisfactory. The appeals of the revenue were dismissed, and the cross appeals of the assessee were allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=412613</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>