Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
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 ...
The High Court held that the deduction u/s 33AC for creating a reserve to acquire new ships must be factored in while computing the deduction u/s 80-I, which is based on profits from operating ships. The amendment in 1996 capping the Section 33AC deduction at 50% of profits did not change the core character of the allowance. If the Section 33AC deduction results in no profits from ships, the Section 80-I deduction cannot be claimed. Regarding proportionate allocation of the Section 33AC deduction between qualifying and non-qualifying ships for Section 80-I purposes, the High Court stated that it cannot provide its own basis for apportionment as an appellate forum.
The High Court held that the deduction u/s 33AC for creating a reserve to acquire new ships must be factored in while computing the deduction u/s 80-I, which is based on profits from operating ships. The amendment in 1996 capping the Section 33AC deduction at 50% of profits did not change the core character of the allowance. If the Section 33AC deduction results in no profits from ships, the Section 80-I deduction cannot be claimed. Regarding proportionate allocation of the Section 33AC deduction between qualifying and non-qualifying ships for Section 80-I purposes, the High Court stated that it cannot provide its own basis for apportionment as an appellate forum.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.