Ratification of resignation acceptance validates separation retrospectively, while withdrawal may be refused through reasoned administrative discretio...
Nature-dependent electricity contracts receive new Ind AS accounting, hedge designation, transition and financial-statement disclosure requirements fr...
Alternative GST remedy permitted protective writ intervention for ex parte adjudication, preserving independent appellate review of input tax credit d...
Assessment against deceased sole proprietor requires proceedings against the legal representative, rendering prior assessment and appellate orders inv...
Residential waste collection classification under SAC 999423 defeats composite-supply exemption where facilitating goods are not transferred to the lo...
ITAT held that indexed cost of improvement for an old developed residential property could not be rejected merely because old bills and vouchers were unavailable. As the registered sale deed and stamp valuation records showed a substantial superstructure, the cost of construction and improvement had to be recomputed on a reasonable basis using the covered area and applicable PWD rates, with consequential indexation. On section 54, the Tribunal held that the assessee was entitled to deduction on the full eligible investment in the new leasehold residential property because the funds were wholly from the assessee and joint naming of the husband did not limit the claim. Optional club membership charges were excluded from eligible cost.
ITAT held that indexed cost of improvement for an old developed residential property could not be rejected merely because old bills and vouchers were unavailable. As the registered sale deed and stamp valuation records showed a substantial superstructure, the cost of construction and improvement had to be recomputed on a reasonable basis using the covered area and applicable PWD rates, with consequential indexation. On section 54, the Tribunal held that the assessee was entitled to deduction on the full eligible investment in the new leasehold residential property because the funds were wholly from the assessee and joint naming of the husband did not limit the claim. Optional club membership charges were excluded from eligible cost.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4813 
Join Channel 
