Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
This is a summary of a case dealing with the determination of fair market value (FMV) for computing long-term capital gains (LTCG) and allowing deductions for cost of improvements. The key points are: the Tax Appellate Tribunal upheld the Assessing Officer's adoption of FMV as per the District Valuation Officer's report, rejecting the assessee's argument for using the 'reverse indexation method'. However, the Tribunal allowed the deduction for cost of improvement incurred in FY 1991-92, which was erroneously omitted by lower authorities. It also directed the Assessing Officer to rectify a mathematical mistake in computing the total indexed cost of improvement. The Tribunal's decision partially favored the assessee regarding the allowable deductions.
This is a summary of a case dealing with the determination of fair market value (FMV) for computing long-term capital gains (LTCG) and allowing deductions for cost of improvements. The key points are: the Tax Appellate Tribunal upheld the Assessing Officer's adoption of FMV as per the District Valuation Officer's report, rejecting the assessee's argument for using the 'reverse indexation method'. However, the Tribunal allowed the deduction for cost of improvement incurred in FY 1991-92, which was erroneously omitted by lower authorities. It also directed the Assessing Officer to rectify a mathematical mistake in computing the total indexed cost of improvement. The Tribunal's decision partially favored the assessee regarding the allowable deductions.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
