<?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 (10) TMI 860 - ITAT SURAT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=413808</link>
    <description>The appeal challenging the disallowance of exemption claimed under section 54F of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2013-14 was dismissed by the Tribunal. The assessee failed to provide sufficient evidence to prove the investment in a new residential property as required by section 54F, leading to the denial of the claim for exemption. The dismissal of the appeal was based on the lack of documentary evidence supporting the investment claim, despite detailed submissions and arguments presented by the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 14 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 21 Oct 2021 08:17:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=659060" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (10) TMI 860 - ITAT SURAT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=413808</link>
      <description>The appeal challenging the disallowance of exemption claimed under section 54F of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2013-14 was dismissed by the Tribunal. The assessee failed to provide sufficient evidence to prove the investment in a new residential property as required by section 54F, leading to the denial of the claim for exemption. The dismissal of the appeal was based on the lack of documentary evidence supporting the investment claim, despite detailed submissions and arguments presented by the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 14 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=413808</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>