<?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>1974 (7) TMI 46 - KARNATAKA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=39729</link>
    <description>The High Court ruled against the Tribunal&#039;s method of estimating the fair market value of the property, stating it lacked justification and directed a rehearing. The Tribunal&#039;s use of a multiplier of 10 was deemed arbitrary and unsupported, with the Court instructing a determination of the rate of return expected by an investor. The Court awarded costs to the assessee and directed the Tribunal to reconsider the appeal, focusing on determining the appropriate rate of return for the property in question.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 25 Jul 1974 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 20 Apr 2010 09:58:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=78275" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1974 (7) TMI 46 - KARNATAKA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=39729</link>
      <description>The High Court ruled against the Tribunal&#039;s method of estimating the fair market value of the property, stating it lacked justification and directed a rehearing. The Tribunal&#039;s use of a multiplier of 10 was deemed arbitrary and unsupported, with the Court instructing a determination of the rate of return expected by an investor. The Court awarded costs to the assessee and directed the Tribunal to reconsider the appeal, focusing on determining the appropriate rate of return for the property in question.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 25 Jul 1974 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=39729</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>