Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
Mutual fund maturity rules require proper rollover, redemption, disclosure, and due diligence; investor gains cannot excuse regulatory breaches or pen...
Threshold exemption excludes exempt services, while stamp-paper purchases avoid reverse charge; consequential service tax penalties were also set asid...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1381 to 1400 of 96174 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Addition on Account of LTCG u/s 50C - The appellant contended that the property was a litigated property, and thus not possible to sell at market rate, arguing that the provisions of section 50C should not apply. The appellant also highlighted that the difference between the valuation adopted by the Stamp Valuation Authority and that declared by the appellant was less than 10%, suggesting that the value declared by the appellant should be accepted. The ITAT, referring to a similar case involving Bhojison Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., where the tribunal allowed the appeal favoring the appellant, found that the appellant's case was directly covered by this decision.
Addition on Account of LTCG u/s 50C - The appellant contended that the property was a litigated property, and thus not possible to sell at market rate, arguing that the provisions of section 50C should not apply. The appellant also highlighted that the difference between the valuation adopted by the Stamp Valuation Authority and that declared by the appellant was less than 10%, suggesting that the value declared by the appellant should be accepted. The ITAT, referring to a similar case involving Bhojison Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., where the tribunal allowed the appeal favoring the appellant, found that the appellant's case was directly covered by this decision.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4809 
Join Channel 
