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...
Page of 4807
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
301 to 320 of 96140 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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.