Charitable trust income application permits verified capital expenditure but rejects deferred pre-operative claims and requires reconsideration of con...
Reinsurance premium deductions require established regulatory breaches, while independently acquired software qualifies within the computer depreciati...
Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
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 4807 
Join Channel 
