<?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>2024 (11) TMI 169 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761183</link>
    <description>The Karnataka HC held that mere non-deposit of sale consideration in a designated capital gains account does not disqualify an assessee from claiming exemption under Section 54F for long-term capital gains. Following the precedent in K. Ramachandra Rao case, the court ruled that the reassessment order and notices were contrary to law and quashed them, deciding in favor of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 06 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 05 Nov 2024 11:55:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=776617" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (11) TMI 169 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761183</link>
      <description>The Karnataka HC held that mere non-deposit of sale consideration in a designated capital gains account does not disqualify an assessee from claiming exemption under Section 54F for long-term capital gains. Following the precedent in K. Ramachandra Rao case, the court ruled that the reassessment order and notices were contrary to law and quashed them, deciding in favor of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 06 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761183</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>