Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is establ...
Reassessment jurisdiction fails where unverified portal information is aggregated without examining the taxpayer's explanation or relevance of entries...
Statutory sanction for delayed reassessment requires approval from the prescribed authority; approval by an inferior authority invalidates jurisdictio...
Transfer pricing margin adjustments require matching treatment of non-operating income and related costs, with comparability issues reconsidered on ev...
Preliminary-expense amortisation and MAT exempt-income adjustments prevailed, while trademark costs and managerial remuneration require fresh verifica...
Export valuation requires contemporaneous evidence; unrelated invoices cannot prove overvaluation, and dual penalties on firm and partner are impermis...
The assessee claimed exemption/deduction u/s 54F on account of investing long-term capital gains in a new residential house. The PCIT disallowed the claim, considering the assessee owned more than one residential house on the date of sale of the original asset. However, the ITAT held that incomes from residential houses held as stock-in-trade were not liable to tax under 'Income from House Property' and did not qualify as 'residential house' u/s 54F. The PCIT provided no reasoning for considering the stock-in-trade property as a residential house. Regarding agricultural land, the PCIT's finding of small houses qualifying as residential houses based on electricity supply and local tax assessment lacked legal basis. The ITAT set aside the PCIT's order denying Section 54F deduction and directing assessment under 'Income from House Property'. The PCIT's direction to deny Chapter VI-A deductions was also set aside as the assessee had not claimed any such deductions. The ITAT held the PCIT's order unsustainable due to lack of concrete findings of error in the AO's order.
The assessee claimed exemption/deduction u/s 54F on account of investing long-term capital gains in a new residential house. The PCIT disallowed the claim, considering the assessee owned more than one residential house on the date of sale of the original asset. However, the ITAT held that incomes from residential houses held as stock-in-trade were not liable to tax under 'Income from House Property' and did not qualify as 'residential house' u/s 54F. The PCIT provided no reasoning for considering the stock-in-trade property as a residential house. Regarding agricultural land, the PCIT's finding of small houses qualifying as residential houses based on electricity supply and local tax assessment lacked legal basis. The ITAT set aside the PCIT's order denying Section 54F deduction and directing assessment under 'Income from House Property'. The PCIT's direction to deny Chapter VI-A deductions was also set aside as the assessee had not claimed any such deductions. The ITAT held the PCIT's order unsustainable due to lack of concrete findings of error in the AO's order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4800
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
