Transfer-pricing treatment of ITeS margins excludes pass-through tax recoveries and separate delayed-receivables interest after working-capital adjust...
Capacity-utilisation adjustments under TNMM can neutralise substantiated COVID-related idle costs where underutilisation materially affects profitabil...
TNMM functional comparability requires excluding rice manufacturers from a pure Basmati rice trader's benchmark and recognising operating export recei...
Working-capital adjustment subsumes delayed-receivable effects in TNMM benchmarking of captive software-development services, avoiding separate notion...
Transfer-pricing comparability requires exclusion of financially illogical super-profit comparables and correction of unsupported annual-report and ma...
Charitable character assessment preserves Section 80G approval despite inclusive spiritual teachings and incidental religious expenditure within the s...
Penalty proceedings for cash-loan acceptance require assessment proceedings and recorded Assessing Officer satisfaction; absent these, the proceedings...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96556 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.