<?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>2026 (2) TMI 1228 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=787080</link>
    <description>For capital gains computation, the year of acquisition was held to follow the effective transfer reflected by payment of full consideration and delivery of possession, not merely the later date of registration; accordingly, the earlier financial year had to be used for indexation. The assessee was also allowed deduction of the cost of completion and related construction improvements because the registered deeds showed the property changed from semi-finished to fully constructed, and the claim could not be rejected solely for lack of old bills or vouchers where the construction was otherwise evident and similar treatment had been accepted for co-owners. Capital gains were therefore required to be recomputed on that basis.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 28 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Feb 2026 07:35:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=888050" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (2) TMI 1228 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=787080</link>
      <description>For capital gains computation, the year of acquisition was held to follow the effective transfer reflected by payment of full consideration and delivery of possession, not merely the later date of registration; accordingly, the earlier financial year had to be used for indexation. The assessee was also allowed deduction of the cost of completion and related construction improvements because the registered deeds showed the property changed from semi-finished to fully constructed, and the claim could not be rejected solely for lack of old bills or vouchers where the construction was otherwise evident and similar treatment had been accepted for co-owners. Capital gains were therefore required to be recomputed on that basis.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=787080</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>