Faceless assessment notice must cover specific prejudicial variations; unexplained final additions without notice breach section 144B and natural just...
Page of 4816
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
4321 to 4340 of 96301 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Dividend stripping on mutual fund units: the ITAT held that dividend could not be treated as a return of capital or deducted from cost of acquisition without a specific statutory basis. Section 94's anti-dividend stripping rule applies only when its conditions are cumulatively satisfied; here, the required purchase and sale timing conditions were not both met, so the provision was inapplicable. General survey findings and alleged SEBI violations, without material linking the assessee to manipulation, did not justify branding the transaction as sham. The addition was deleted on merits.
Dividend stripping on mutual fund units: the ITAT held that dividend could not be treated as a return of capital or deducted from cost of acquisition without a specific statutory basis. Section 94's anti-dividend stripping rule applies only when its conditions are cumulatively satisfied; here, the required purchase and sale timing conditions were not both met, so the provision was inapplicable. General survey findings and alleged SEBI violations, without material linking the assessee to manipulation, did not justify branding the transaction as sham. The addition was deleted on merits.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.