<?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>1992 (7) TMI 106 - ITAT BOMBAY-A</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=58027</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal ITAT BOMBAY-A upheld the revenue authorities&#039; decision in the case concerning the interpretation of section 54 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The appellant&#039;s claim for exemption under section 54 for long-term capital gains was denied as the new asset was not purchased within the stipulated period. The Tribunal clarified that the legislative intent required the investment of sale proceeds within the specified timeframe, emphasizing the payment of purchase consideration. As the agreement for the new asset was entered into before the prescribed period, the appellant&#039;s appeal was dismissed, affirming the addition of long-term capital gains.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 14 Jul 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Dec 2010 18:47:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=96485" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1992 (7) TMI 106 - ITAT BOMBAY-A</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=58027</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal ITAT BOMBAY-A upheld the revenue authorities&#039; decision in the case concerning the interpretation of section 54 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The appellant&#039;s claim for exemption under section 54 for long-term capital gains was denied as the new asset was not purchased within the stipulated period. The Tribunal clarified that the legislative intent required the investment of sale proceeds within the specified timeframe, emphasizing the payment of purchase consideration. As the agreement for the new asset was entered into before the prescribed period, the appellant&#039;s appeal was dismissed, affirming the addition of long-term capital gains.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 14 Jul 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=58027</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>