Form 26AS evidence requires successor-entity accounting verification after business transfer, while invoice-supported related-party advertising expend...
Money-laundering judgment timing requires awaiting the scheduled-offence decision despite continuation of the underlying trial where outcomes directly...
Accredited investor eligibility expands through securities-market exposure, while alternative investment fund disputes require prescribed resolution a...
Customs Assessment Portal centralises classification and valuation guidance to support consistent, transparent and informed compliance across stakehol...
Page of 4918
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
101 to 120 of 98359 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The assessee sold agricultural land during the year which the Assessing Officer (AO) treated as a capital asset, leading to levy of long-term capital gains tax. The Tribunal held that the AO erred in disregarding the certificate issued by the Tehsildar certifying the land as agricultural land situated beyond municipal limits. The AO failed to examine the discrepancies in distances mentioned by the Tehsildar and relied solely on the photocopy certificate without verifying its authenticity. The Tribunal relied on the certificate issued by the Survey of India, Government of India, to conclude that the land sold was agricultural land beyond municipal limits, not a capital asset, and hence not liable to capital gains tax u/s 45. Regarding deductions u/ss 54B and 54F claimed by the assessee for reinvestment in agricultural land and residential property, the Tribunal held that the Appellate Authorities have the power to consider claims based on material available on record, even if not claimed in the original or revised return. The assessee was held entitled to the deductions u/ss 54B and 54F. The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal.
The assessee sold agricultural land during the year which the Assessing Officer (AO) treated as a capital asset, leading to levy of long-term capital gains tax. The Tribunal held that the AO erred in disregarding the certificate issued by the Tehsildar certifying the land as agricultural land situated beyond municipal limits. The AO failed to examine the discrepancies in distances mentioned by the Tehsildar and relied solely on the photocopy certificate without verifying its authenticity. The Tribunal relied on the certificate issued by the Survey of India, Government of India, to conclude that the land sold was agricultural land beyond municipal limits, not a capital asset, and hence not liable to capital gains tax u/s 45. Regarding deductions u/ss 54B and 54F claimed by the assessee for reinvestment in agricultural land and residential property, the Tribunal held that the Appellate Authorities have the power to consider claims based on material available on record, even if not claimed in the original or revised return. The assessee was held entitled to the deductions u/ss 54B and 54F. The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.