Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
Business expenditure substantiation supports scrap credits, statutory payments and expense claims, while depreciation requires proof of actual busines...
Deduction u/s 80IB(10) for an undertaking developing and building housing projects approved before March 31 by a local authority. The scope of the definition of 'built-up area' was examined. The DVO's report showing violation related to two row houses having an area more than 1500 sq.ft. was not considered. It was held that for projects approved prior to April 1, 2005, the assessee could legitimately claim deduction u/s 80IB(10) based on the plans approved by the Planning Authority, as the concept of built-up area, including inner measurement, projections, balconies, and wall thickness, but excluding common areas, was not applicable. Applying such parameters retrospectively would lead to absurd results. The expression 'built-up area' introduced from April 1, 2005, cannot be applied retrospectively, and the Tribunal was justified in excluding the balcony area for the period up to April 1, 2005. The decision was in favor of the assessee.
Deduction u/s 80IB(10) for an undertaking developing and building housing projects approved before March 31 by a local authority. The scope of the definition of 'built-up area' was examined. The DVO's report showing violation related to two row houses having an area more than 1500 sq.ft. was not considered. It was held that for projects approved prior to April 1, 2005, the assessee could legitimately claim deduction u/s 80IB(10) based on the plans approved by the Planning Authority, as the concept of built-up area, including inner measurement, projections, balconies, and wall thickness, but excluding common areas, was not applicable. Applying such parameters retrospectively would lead to absurd results. The expression 'built-up area' introduced from April 1, 2005, cannot be applied retrospectively, and the Tribunal was justified in excluding the balcony area for the period up to April 1, 2005. The decision was in favor of the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
