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...
Page of 4916
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
41 to 60 of 98302 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Joint ownership of multiple residential properties at the time of sale of the original asset does not disqualify the assessee from claiming deduction u/s 54F of the Income Tax Act. The Appellate Tribunal, relying on the judgments of the Madras High Court in Dr. Smt. P.K.Vasanthi Rangarajan and the Mumbai ITAT in Zainul Abedin Ghaswala, held that merely owning another property jointly on the transfer date cannot be a ground for denying Section 54F deduction on capital gains from the sale of the original asset. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s findings, dismissing the Revenue's grounds on this issue.
Joint ownership of multiple residential properties at the time of sale of the original asset does not disqualify the assessee from claiming deduction u/s 54F of the Income Tax Act. The Appellate Tribunal, relying on the judgments of the Madras High Court in Dr. Smt. P.K.Vasanthi Rangarajan and the Mumbai ITAT in Zainul Abedin Ghaswala, held that merely owning another property jointly on the transfer date cannot be a ground for denying Section 54F deduction on capital gains from the sale of the original asset. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s findings, dismissing the Revenue's grounds on this issue.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4916 
