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 Appellate Tribunal addressed the claim of deduction u/s 32AD for additional investment allowance on an investment made in the financial year 2015-16. The issue arose due to a difference of opinion among the Tribunal members. The Central Government's notification regarding backward areas was a key point of contention. One member upheld the denial of the claim based on the timing of the notification, while another member allowed the deduction for the relevant financial years. The Tribunal ultimately ruled in favor of the assessee, emphasizing that the purpose of section 32AD is to provide a benefit for a period of 5 years, and that the notification should be interpreted liberally in favor of the assessee. The Tribunal concluded that the notification did not override the provisions of section 32AD, and the assessee was entitled to the deduction under the said section.
The Appellate Tribunal addressed the claim of deduction u/s 32AD for additional investment allowance on an investment made in the financial year 2015-16. The issue arose due to a difference of opinion among the Tribunal members. The Central Government's notification regarding backward areas was a key point of contention. One member upheld the denial of the claim based on the timing of the notification, while another member allowed the deduction for the relevant financial years. The Tribunal ultimately ruled in favor of the assessee, emphasizing that the purpose of section 32AD is to provide a benefit for a period of 5 years, and that the notification should be interpreted liberally in favor of the assessee. The Tribunal concluded that the notification did not override the provisions of section 32AD, and the assessee was entitled to the deduction under the said section.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
