Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Limitation in oppression and mismanagement proceedings: prior knowledge of removal and dilution barred the challenge, with valuation directions upheld...
Insolvency professional agency governance rules amended to add nominee directors, tighten independent director eligibility, and regulate managing dire...
Section 54F requires purchase of the new residential house within the statutory period, and an unregistered banakhat by itself was not enough to prove completion of purchase within that time frame. Because the substantial payment was made more than one year before transfer and the registered sale deed was executed beyond two years after transfer, the deduction could not be sustained on the existing record; the issue was restored for limited verification of the flow of funds and linkage with sale proceeds. The addition under section 69 also required fresh factual examination, as the bank statements and documentary evidence were not properly verified and it was unclear whether all material had been before the AO. Both matters were remanded.
Section 54F requires purchase of the new residential house within the statutory period, and an unregistered banakhat by itself was not enough to prove completion of purchase within that time frame. Because the substantial payment was made more than one year before transfer and the registered sale deed was executed beyond two years after transfer, the deduction could not be sustained on the existing record; the issue was restored for limited verification of the flow of funds and linkage with sale proceeds. The addition under section 69 also required fresh factual examination, as the bank statements and documentary evidence were not properly verified and it was unclear whether all material had been before the AO. Both matters were remanded.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.