Commercial vehicle depreciation, scientifically determined warranty provisions and exempt-income disallowances were resolved in favour of the taxpayer...
Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Admission of crucial additional evidence supporting...
Composite residential flat exemption upheld where supplementary agreement merged adjoining units and additional evidence supported the taxpayer's investment claim.
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
Admission of crucial additional evidence supporting capital-gains exemptions was valid because the Commissioner (Appeals) obtained a remand report and found the supplementary agreement necessary for substantial justice. The agreement amalgamated two adjoining flats into one composite residential unit with a single surviving flat number. The taxpayer's investment and stipulated share in that composite unit supported exemptions under sections 54 and 54F, as the Assessing Officer had not verified facts sufficient to displace that position. The disallowance was deleted and the revenue's appeal was dismissed.
Admission of crucial additional evidence supporting capital-gains exemptions was valid because the Commissioner (Appeals) obtained a remand report and found the supplementary agreement necessary for substantial justice. The agreement amalgamated two adjoining flats into one composite residential unit with a single surviving flat number. The taxpayer's investment and stipulated share in that composite unit supported exemptions under sections 54 and 54F, as the Assessing Officer had not verified facts sufficient to displace that position. The disallowance was deleted and the revenue's appeal was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.