<?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>2022 (3) TMI 216 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419178</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal against the addition of short term capital gain under section 50C of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal applied the third proviso to section 50C(1) retrospectively, noting that the difference between the declared sale consideration and the DVO&#039;s valuation fell within the permissible range. Consequently, the addition of Rs. 2,37,400 towards short term capital gain was deleted, and the appeal was allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 03 Mar 2022 15:39:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=671952" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (3) TMI 216 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419178</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal against the addition of short term capital gain under section 50C of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal applied the third proviso to section 50C(1) retrospectively, noting that the difference between the declared sale consideration and the DVO&#039;s valuation fell within the permissible range. Consequently, the addition of Rs. 2,37,400 towards short term capital gain was deleted, and the appeal was allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419178</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>