Invoice-based recovery claims remain time-barred despite separate winding-up proceedings, absent valid acknowledgment or part-payment of the disputed ...
Extended limitation fails without specific suppression allegations, while overseas employee secondment remains taxable as manpower supply within norma...
Time-share accommodation classification excludes Club or Association Service where purchasers receive contractual occupancy rights without genuine mem...
Page of 4790
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
21 to 40 of 95794 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Revision u/s 263 - admissibility of deduction u/s 54F - CIT has misinterpreted the provision of law to hold that the assessee was ineligible to claim exemption u/s. 54F of the Act on the investment made in the land beyond two years - The Tribunal agreed with the assessee's interpretation of the law, stating that Section 54F allows a time period of three years for the construction of a house property to claim exemption. As the purchase of land was intended for construction, the Pr.CIT's interpretation was deemed incorrect. Consequently, the order of the Pr.CIT was set aside, and the appeal of the assessee was allowed.
Revision u/s 263 - admissibility of deduction u/s 54F - CIT has misinterpreted the provision of law to hold that the assessee was ineligible to claim exemption u/s. 54F of the Act on the investment made in the land beyond two years - The Tribunal agreed with the assessee's interpretation of the law, stating that Section 54F allows a time period of three years for the construction of a house property to claim exemption. As the purchase of land was intended for construction, the Pr.CIT's interpretation was deemed incorrect. Consequently, the order of the Pr.CIT was set aside, and the appeal of the assessee was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4790
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
