Online bond platforms may offer overseas-regulated products and tax-specific bonds subject to disclosures, compliance safeguards and revised complianc...
Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
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.