Faceless reassessment jurisdiction turned on retrospective AO definition, with later faceless-assessment changes treated as clarificatory and procedur...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
2121 to 2140 of 96100 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) adjudicated on two issues: disallowance of excess depreciation claimed on a building and disallowance of expenses. Regarding the first issue, the ITAT held that the legal fiction u/s 50C for computing capital gains cannot be extended to Section 32 for claiming depreciation on a block of assets. The actual sale consideration, not the notional value u/s 50C, should be reduced from the opening written down value (WDV) for computing depreciation. The disallowance made by the lower authorities was set aside. Concerning the second issue, the assessee agreed to produce necessary evidence supporting the expenses claimed. The matter was restored to the Assessing Officer to verify the documentary evidence and decide accordingly.
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) adjudicated on two issues: disallowance of excess depreciation claimed on a building and disallowance of expenses. Regarding the first issue, the ITAT held that the legal fiction u/s 50C for computing capital gains cannot be extended to Section 32 for claiming depreciation on a block of assets. The actual sale consideration, not the notional value u/s 50C, should be reduced from the opening written down value (WDV) for computing depreciation. The disallowance made by the lower authorities was set aside. Concerning the second issue, the assessee agreed to produce necessary evidence supporting the expenses claimed. The matter was restored to the Assessing Officer to verify the documentary evidence and decide accordingly.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.