<?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 (6) TMI 359 - ITAT JABALPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792978</link>
    <description>Capital gains on immovable property are discussed as becoming chargeable when actual transfer occurs by registered conveyance, not merely on an agreement to sell, where possession is not handed over in part performance. The note also explains that valuation for long-term capital gains required fresh consideration because the assessee&#039;s objections to the DVO report had not been properly addressed, while the first proviso to section 50C(1) was treated as applicable retrospectively where part consideration had been received through account payee banking channels. On section 54, construction expenditure for a second house was treated as separately examinable from land cost, but the factual verification was incomplete and the matter was restored for fresh inquiry.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 06 Jun 2026 08:42:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=905781" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (6) TMI 359 - ITAT JABALPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792978</link>
      <description>Capital gains on immovable property are discussed as becoming chargeable when actual transfer occurs by registered conveyance, not merely on an agreement to sell, where possession is not handed over in part performance. The note also explains that valuation for long-term capital gains required fresh consideration because the assessee&#039;s objections to the DVO report had not been properly addressed, while the first proviso to section 50C(1) was treated as applicable retrospectively where part consideration had been received through account payee banking channels. On section 54, construction expenditure for a second house was treated as separately examinable from land cost, but the factual verification was incomplete and the matter was restored for fresh inquiry.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792978</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>