Patent-settlement expenditure treated as commercially expedient revenue outlay, with foreign-law restrictions inapplicable before the prospective amen...
International transaction benchmarking restricts transfer pricing adjustments to associated-enterprise dealings, while functional comparability govern...
Joint development agreements defer taxable transfer where possession lacks part performance, while completed flats determine consideration and exempti...
Passenger baggage re-export requires true declaration and cannot be granted indirectly through discretionary redemption of undeclared prohibited goods...
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.