Restriction of Input Tax Credit under Rule 86A applies only to fraudulently or ineligible availed credit; mere wrongful recipient availment is insuffi...
Business reorganisation requires recognition of successor's modified return; draft orders against dissolved transferor quashed and fresh review direct...
Pre-commencement R&D deduction denied where business had not commenced; deeming benefit requires tangible start of manufacture or commercial exploitat...
The Tribunal held that a 1991-92 letter of intent did not create enforceable rights in the immovable property because the area and identity of the premises were not finalised and the allotment crystallised only later. Enforceable rights arose only when the share and occupancy documents were issued and the lease deed was executed and registered in financial year 2010-11. The holding period was therefore reckoned from 2010-11, and since the property was sold on 02.04.2012, it was held for less than 36 months. The asset was correctly treated as a short-term capital asset, and the gain was taxable as short-term capital gain; contrary authorities were distinguished on the basis that they involved final or binding allotments.
The Tribunal held that a 1991-92 letter of intent did not create enforceable rights in the immovable property because the area and identity of the premises were not finalised and the allotment crystallised only later. Enforceable rights arose only when the share and occupancy documents were issued and the lease deed was executed and registered in financial year 2010-11. The holding period was therefore reckoned from 2010-11, and since the property was sold on 02.04.2012, it was held for less than 36 months. The asset was correctly treated as a short-term capital asset, and the gain was taxable as short-term capital gain; contrary authorities were distinguished on the basis that they involved final or binding allotments.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.