<?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>1985 (7) TMI 127 - ITAT ALLAHABAD-B</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=56845</link>
    <description>Audit-objection material can support reopening under section 59(b) of the Estate Duty Act where the authority relies on factual information indicating escaped assessment or undervaluation, and not merely on the audit party&#039;s view of law; the reopening was treated as valid. Exemption for a house under section 33(1)(n) is available only where the property is exclusively used for residence, so an incomplete house under construction did not qualify and the exemption was withdrawn. On ambiguous deductions relating to HUF obligations for marriage, maintenance and education of female members, the interpretation favourable to the assessee was applied, and the disallowance was deleted. The share valuation addition was also deleted because the nil valuation was not shown to be erroneous.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 15 Jul 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Dec 2010 10:16:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=95307" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1985 (7) TMI 127 - ITAT ALLAHABAD-B</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=56845</link>
      <description>Audit-objection material can support reopening under section 59(b) of the Estate Duty Act where the authority relies on factual information indicating escaped assessment or undervaluation, and not merely on the audit party&#039;s view of law; the reopening was treated as valid. Exemption for a house under section 33(1)(n) is available only where the property is exclusively used for residence, so an incomplete house under construction did not qualify and the exemption was withdrawn. On ambiguous deductions relating to HUF obligations for marriage, maintenance and education of female members, the interpretation favourable to the assessee was applied, and the disallowance was deleted. The share valuation addition was also deleted because the nil valuation was not shown to be erroneous.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 15 Jul 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=56845</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>