Transfer-pricing treatment of ITeS margins excludes pass-through tax recoveries and separate delayed-receivables interest after working-capital adjust...
Capacity-utilisation adjustments under TNMM can neutralise substantiated COVID-related idle costs where underutilisation materially affects profitabil...
TNMM functional comparability requires excluding rice manufacturers from a pure Basmati rice trader's benchmark and recognising operating export recei...
Working-capital adjustment subsumes delayed-receivable effects in TNMM benchmarking of captive software-development services, avoiding separate notion...
Transfer-pricing comparability requires exclusion of financially illogical super-profit comparables and correction of unsupported annual-report and ma...
Charitable character assessment preserves Section 80G approval despite inclusive spiritual teachings and incidental religious expenditure within the s...
Penalty proceedings for cash-loan acceptance require assessment proceedings and recorded Assessing Officer satisfaction; absent these, the proceedings...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
LTCG - exemption claimed u/s 54F - fractional ownership - Whether joint ownership of 16.67% in six flats constituted owning more than one residential house. - The ITAT concluded that joint ownership is distinct from absolute ownership. None of the co-owners, including the appellant, could claim full ownership of any single flat. The Tribunal referred to the Hon’ble Supreme Court's decision in Seth Banarsi Dass Gupta v. CIT, which stated that fractional ownership does not equate to full ownership for tax exemptions. It also considered various ITAT decisions supporting this view. The Tribunal ruled that the appellant's joint ownership did not disqualify him from the exemption u/s 54F. The Assessing Officer was directed to allow the claimed exemption.
LTCG - exemption claimed u/s 54F - fractional ownership - Whether joint ownership of 16.67% in six flats constituted owning more than one residential house. - The ITAT concluded that joint ownership is distinct from absolute ownership. None of the co-owners, including the appellant, could claim full ownership of any single flat. The Tribunal referred to the Hon’ble Supreme Court's decision in Seth Banarsi Dass Gupta v. CIT, which stated that fractional ownership does not equate to full ownership for tax exemptions. It also considered various ITAT decisions supporting this view. The Tribunal ruled that the appellant's joint ownership did not disqualify him from the exemption u/s 54F. The Assessing Officer was directed to allow the claimed exemption.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
