<?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 (7) TMI 1085 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=425530</link>
    <description>Exemption under section 54F cannot be finally granted without verification of the statutory factual conditions, including whether the taxpayer owned more than one residential house on the transfer date. As the first appellate authority allowed the claim without adequate inquiry, remand report, or response to objections in the assessment order, the matter required fresh adjudication on proper evidence and after hearing both sides. The related cross-objection was also sent back because the Revenue&#039;s challenge was being restored and the connected grounds had not been adjudicated earlier. The controversy was therefore returned for reconsideration on merits, with the appeal and cross-objection treated as allowed for statistical purposes.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 26 Jul 2022 09:18:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=686042" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (7) TMI 1085 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=425530</link>
      <description>Exemption under section 54F cannot be finally granted without verification of the statutory factual conditions, including whether the taxpayer owned more than one residential house on the transfer date. As the first appellate authority allowed the claim without adequate inquiry, remand report, or response to objections in the assessment order, the matter required fresh adjudication on proper evidence and after hearing both sides. The related cross-objection was also sent back because the Revenue&#039;s challenge was being restored and the connected grounds had not been adjudicated earlier. The controversy was therefore returned for reconsideration on merits, with the appeal and cross-objection treated as allowed for statistical purposes.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=425530</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>