Unsubstantiated exempt agricultural income claim sustains concealment penalty after disclosure only on departmental detection and no bona fide evidenc...
Enhancement in reassessment could not bring to tax long-term capital gain from sale of the Manesar property as a new source of income when reopening was confined to unexplained investment in the Panchkula property; the Tribunal held that appellate enhancement does not extend to an altogether new source and deleted the addition. It also held that the Manesar asset was a residential house property, supported by the sale deed, occupation certificate, approved plans and loan records, so indexed cost of construction or improvement was allowable. On the exemption claim, substantial investment in a new residential house within the prescribed period entitled the assessee to deduction under sections 54/54F despite no deposit in the Capital Gain Account Scheme.
Enhancement in reassessment could not bring to tax long-term capital gain from sale of the Manesar property as a new source of income when reopening was confined to unexplained investment in the Panchkula property; the Tribunal held that appellate enhancement does not extend to an altogether new source and deleted the addition. It also held that the Manesar asset was a residential house property, supported by the sale deed, occupation certificate, approved plans and loan records, so indexed cost of construction or improvement was allowable. On the exemption claim, substantial investment in a new residential house within the prescribed period entitled the assessee to deduction under sections 54/54F despite no deposit in the Capital Gain Account Scheme.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
