<?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>2017 (4) TMI 1640 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313985</link>
    <description>The HC upheld ITAT&#039;s decision treating the transaction as a slump sale rather than itemized sale of individual assets. The assessee sold soft drink business assets, and the revenue department sought to tax it as capital gains from individual asset sales. ITAT found that the original agreement between parties recorded total assets without individual valuations, and individual asset values were only provided later at the Assessing Officer&#039;s request based on book values. The HC agreed that the transaction constituted a slump sale of the business as a going concern, making it non-taxable. All three issues were decided in favor of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 24 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 May 2024 08:33:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=752759" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (4) TMI 1640 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313985</link>
      <description>The HC upheld ITAT&#039;s decision treating the transaction as a slump sale rather than itemized sale of individual assets. The assessee sold soft drink business assets, and the revenue department sought to tax it as capital gains from individual asset sales. ITAT found that the original agreement between parties recorded total assets without individual valuations, and individual asset values were only provided later at the Assessing Officer&#039;s request based on book values. The HC agreed that the transaction constituted a slump sale of the business as a going concern, making it non-taxable. All three issues were decided in favor of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 24 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313985</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>