<?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 (11) TMI 320 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=414539</link>
    <description>The tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, vacating the disallowance of the claim for exemption of Long Term Capital Gain (LTCG) under Section 10(38) of the Income Tax Act. The addition under Section 69C for commission expenditure was also vacated. The tribunal found the transactions genuine based on substantial documentary evidence provided by the assessee, noting the lack of concrete evidence from the department to refute the genuineness of the transactions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 Oct 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Nov 2021 07:01:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=660664" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (11) TMI 320 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=414539</link>
      <description>The tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, vacating the disallowance of the claim for exemption of Long Term Capital Gain (LTCG) under Section 10(38) of the Income Tax Act. The addition under Section 69C for commission expenditure was also vacated. The tribunal found the transactions genuine based on substantial documentary evidence provided by the assessee, noting the lack of concrete evidence from the department to refute the genuineness of the transactions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Oct 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=414539</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>