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...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
Rectification of mistake u/s 254 - Depreciation on the non-compete fee denied - CIT(A) allowed the claim - ITAT rejected the claim - Whether AO has accepted the claim of the assessee - the words “similar business or commercial rights” have to necessarily result in an intangible asset against the entire world which can be asserted as such to qualify for depreciation under Section 32(1)(ii) - Merely because another appeal raising similar questions has been admitted by this Court, also does not persuade us to admit the present appeal as well only on this ground. - HC
Rectification of mistake u/s 254 - Depreciation on the non-compete fee denied - CIT(A) allowed the claim - ITAT rejected the claim - Whether AO has accepted the claim of the assessee - the words “similar business or commercial rights” have to necessarily result in an intangible asset against the entire world which can be asserted as such to qualify for depreciation under Section 32(1)(ii) - Merely because another appeal raising similar questions has been admitted by this Court, also does not persuade us to admit the present appeal as well only on this ground. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.