<?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>1979 (6) TMI 19 - MADRAS High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=36775</link>
    <description>The court concluded that the valuation of Rs. 9,400 should be considered as the real cost of acquisition for computing capital gains. The Tribunal&#039;s decision that the valuation was notional was deemed incorrect. The court ruled in favor of the revenue, entitling them to costs, including counsel&#039;s fee of Rs. 500. The AAC&#039;s order on the valuation date was considered final and not to be disturbed by the court&#039;s judgment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 18 Jun 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 24 Mar 2010 13:51:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=75321" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1979 (6) TMI 19 - MADRAS High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=36775</link>
      <description>The court concluded that the valuation of Rs. 9,400 should be considered as the real cost of acquisition for computing capital gains. The Tribunal&#039;s decision that the valuation was notional was deemed incorrect. The court ruled in favor of the revenue, entitling them to costs, including counsel&#039;s fee of Rs. 500. The AAC&#039;s order on the valuation date was considered final and not to be disturbed by the court&#039;s judgment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Jun 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=36775</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>