Employee stock-shortage penalties do not constitute consideration for services, preventing GST collection under Schedule II in employment relationship...
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...
Page of 4830
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
181 to 200 of 96587 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 54F - as pursuant to the JDA, assessee had received multiple residential units and not a single residential unit - The Tribunal observed that prior to the amendment to section 54F of the Act, various judicial pronouncements had interpreted the term "a residential house" to include multiple residential units. Citing legal principles, the Tribunal highlighted that decisions interpreting statutory provisions form binding precedents. It reiterated that the interpretation of "a residential house" as including multiple units, upheld by various High Courts, including the Karnataka High Court, was binding. - the Tribunal concluded that the assessee is entitled to the benefit of section 54F of the Act for all the units received under the JDA, as the relevant assessment year predates the amendment. Therefore, the appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed.
LTCG - deduction u/s 54F - as pursuant to the JDA, assessee had received multiple residential units and not a single residential unit - The Tribunal observed that prior to the amendment to section 54F of the Act, various judicial pronouncements had interpreted the term "a residential house" to include multiple residential units. Citing legal principles, the Tribunal highlighted that decisions interpreting statutory provisions form binding precedents. It reiterated that the interpretation of "a residential house" as including multiple units, upheld by various High Courts, including the Karnataka High Court, was binding. - the Tribunal concluded that the assessee is entitled to the benefit of section 54F of the Act for all the units received under the JDA, as the relevant assessment year predates the amendment. Therefore, the appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.