<?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 (4) TMI 672 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=421006</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partly allowed both appeals in the case. It directed the Assessing Officer to adopt Rs. 250 per sq. yard as the fair market value of the property as of 01.04.1981. The area considered for computing the cost of acquisition was confirmed as 5954 sq. yards. The cost of construction was not included in the computation of Long Term Capital Gain, and the exemption was granted under Section 54F instead of Section 54.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 15 Apr 2022 08:54:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=676092" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (4) TMI 672 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=421006</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partly allowed both appeals in the case. It directed the Assessing Officer to adopt Rs. 250 per sq. yard as the fair market value of the property as of 01.04.1981. The area considered for computing the cost of acquisition was confirmed as 5954 sq. yards. The cost of construction was not included in the computation of Long Term Capital Gain, and the exemption was granted under Section 54F instead of Section 54.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=421006</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>