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...
The ITAT reviewed a case regarding the exemption u/s 11 of the Act concerning non-charging of interest on advances for property purchase. The Assessee's society extended advances to a specified person for land purchase without interest or security. The AO argued it violated sec. 13(1)(c) r.w.s. 13(2)(a). However, as the advances were deemed genuine business deals by CIT(E) and not in violation of sec. 13(1)(c), and since they related to land for educational activities, sec. 13(2)(a) was inapplicable. The revenue accepted the advances in previous years, and CIT(E) considered them genuine business transactions. Denying exemption u/s 11 based on notional interest addition was unjustified. The ITAT directed AO to vacate the additions, ruling in favor of the assessee.
The ITAT reviewed a case regarding the exemption u/s 11 of the Act concerning non-charging of interest on advances for property purchase. The Assessee's society extended advances to a specified person for land purchase without interest or security. The AO argued it violated sec. 13(1)(c) r.w.s. 13(2)(a). However, as the advances were deemed genuine business deals by CIT(E) and not in violation of sec. 13(1)(c), and since they related to land for educational activities, sec. 13(2)(a) was inapplicable. The revenue accepted the advances in previous years, and CIT(E) considered them genuine business transactions. Denying exemption u/s 11 based on notional interest addition was unjustified. The ITAT directed AO to vacate the additions, ruling in favor of the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
