Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
The ITAT Ahmedabad, in proceedings u/s 201(1) and 201(1A), found the assessee-in-default for non-deduction of TDS u/s 194IA on property purchases. The assessee failed to provide evidence to support eligibility for proviso to Section 201(1), leading to dismissal of appeal. Interest u/s 201(1A) upheld till payee's return filing. Penalty u/s 271(c) for non-deduction of TDS u/s 194-IA was deemed justified. The appeal was decided against the assessee.
The ITAT Ahmedabad, in proceedings u/s 201(1) and 201(1A), found the assessee-in-default for non-deduction of TDS u/s 194IA on property purchases. The assessee failed to provide evidence to support eligibility for proviso to Section 201(1), leading to dismissal of appeal. Interest u/s 201(1A) upheld till payee's return filing. Penalty u/s 271(c) for non-deduction of TDS u/s 194-IA was deemed justified. The appeal was decided against the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.