Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Enpro Finance Ltd (ITAT Mumbai)
Appeal Number : ITA No. 4428/Mum/2008
Date of Judgement/Order : 27/06/2012
Related Assessment Year : 2004-05
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Clause-b of sub section (1) of section 54G does not use its specific phrase ‘for the purpose of its business of under taking’ except that the business should be in non-urban area. Therefore, it can be interpreted that assessee should carry on any business in non urban area. If the amounts are utilized for acquisition of assets for the purpose of its business, this should qualify for the purpose of exemption under section 54G as there is no requirement that the land and building should be used for the purpose of the business of industrial undertaking.

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI

ITA No.4428/Mum/2008 – (Assessment year: 2004-05)

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax 

Vs

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031