<?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 (6) TMI 1277 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=424436</link>
    <description>The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) ruled in favor of the assessee in a case concerning the interpretation and application of Section 43CA of the Income Tax Act. The ITAT held that the addition made under Section 43CA was not justified as it fell within the tolerance band allowed by a proviso introduced in 2018. Additionally, the ITAT found that the Assessing Officer (AO) correctly applied Section 43CA by considering the ready reckoner rate at the time of initial booking, not the sale date. The ITAT quashed the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax&#039;s revision order, concluding that the AO&#039;s original order was not erroneous.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 28 Jun 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 30 Jun 2022 09:35:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=683555" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (6) TMI 1277 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=424436</link>
      <description>The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) ruled in favor of the assessee in a case concerning the interpretation and application of Section 43CA of the Income Tax Act. The ITAT held that the addition made under Section 43CA was not justified as it fell within the tolerance band allowed by a proviso introduced in 2018. Additionally, the ITAT found that the Assessing Officer (AO) correctly applied Section 43CA by considering the ready reckoner rate at the time of initial booking, not the sale date. The ITAT quashed the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax&#039;s revision order, concluding that the AO&#039;s original order was not erroneous.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Jun 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=424436</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>