Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
LTCG - Exemption claimed u/s. 54F - Failure to deposited in capital gain deposit scheme - The appellant sold a property, deposited the sale proceeds in a capital gain account scheme, and intended to utilize the funds for the purchase or construction of a new property within the statutory period. However, the completion of construction was delayed beyond the prescribed time frame. The ITAT ruled in favor of the appellant, emphasizing that the utilization of funds from the capital gain account scheme for the new investment was not mandatory, and the appellant could use other available funds without affecting their claim for deduction.
LTCG - Exemption claimed u/s. 54F - Failure to deposited in capital gain deposit scheme - The appellant sold a property, deposited the sale proceeds in a capital gain account scheme, and intended to utilize the funds for the purchase or construction of a new property within the statutory period. However, the completion of construction was delayed beyond the prescribed time frame. The ITAT ruled in favor of the appellant, emphasizing that the utilization of funds from the capital gain account scheme for the new investment was not mandatory, and the appellant could use other available funds without affecting their claim for deduction.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
