Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
Defined public benefit can retain charitable character; registration renewal requires examining genuine activities and legal compliance, not surplus a...
Capital reduction is distinct from share buy-back, preventing buy-back tax; restructuring interest and related business deductions also survive scruti...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
981 to 1000 of 95833 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
LTCG - deduction u/s 54 denied - Despite the assessee's claim of having constructed a residential property within the specified timeframe, a physical inspection revealed the inadequacy of the alleged residential house. The property lacked basic amenities necessary for habitation, such as proper boundary walls, kitchen, electricity, and water connections. Certificates provided by the assessee were deemed insufficient to counter the findings of the physical inspection. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the decision to deny the deduction under section 54, ruling that the assessee had not constructed a residential house within the prescribed time and without the necessary amenities for dwelling.
LTCG - deduction u/s 54 denied - Despite the assessee's claim of having constructed a residential property within the specified timeframe, a physical inspection revealed the inadequacy of the alleged residential house. The property lacked basic amenities necessary for habitation, such as proper boundary walls, kitchen, electricity, and water connections. Certificates provided by the assessee were deemed insufficient to counter the findings of the physical inspection. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the decision to deny the deduction under section 54, ruling that the assessee had not constructed a residential house within the prescribed time and without the necessary amenities for dwelling.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.