Bogus donation receipts justified commission income assessment and defeated political-party tax exemption for inaccurate accounts and reporting failur...
Pure reimbursement without income element escapes tax withholding, while delayed withholding and unsupported provisions face deferred or renewed scrut...
Public benefit requirement defeats charitable registration where residents' association services are reciprocal, member-only facilities governed by mu...
Exempt-income expenditure disallowance is confined to investments that actually generated exempt income, while supported business expenses remain dedu...
Objective characteristics and principal use govern mining-tyre classification, while fresh advance ruling applications may rely on additional technica...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
801 to 820 of 96092 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The Appellate Tribunal addressed the issue of Long-Term Capital Gains (LTCG) on the sale of agricultural land, focusing on the property's location in relation to municipal limits u/s 2(14). The Tribunal considered the distance of the land from a specific landmark as confirmed by Income-tax Department inspectors and Tehsildar. The assessee argued that the distance should be calculated based on the municipal limits in place before a certain date, emphasizing the lack of subsequent notifications expanding the limits. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal, ruling that the land in question did not qualify as a capital asset for tax purposes.
The Appellate Tribunal addressed the issue of Long-Term Capital Gains (LTCG) on the sale of agricultural land, focusing on the property's location in relation to municipal limits u/s 2(14). The Tribunal considered the distance of the land from a specific landmark as confirmed by Income-tax Department inspectors and Tehsildar. The assessee argued that the distance should be calculated based on the municipal limits in place before a certain date, emphasizing the lack of subsequent notifications expanding the limits. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal, ruling that the land in question did not qualify as a capital asset for tax purposes.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.