Capital Asset Conversion Requires Proven Business Stock Treatment; Paper Consideration in Spousal Flat Transfers Does Not Create Taxable Business Inco...
Human-probability test defeats political donation deduction where banking records mask accommodation-entry fund layering and evidence shows non-genuin...
Commercial property status protects capital-gains exemption when residential-house ownership limits are tested, while agricultural-land character gove...
Investigation deposits refunded after failed customs demands fall outside the statutory appellate pre-deposit interest regime and may attract compensa...
Resolution plan finality extinguishes unquantified operational-creditor claims and pending proceedings unless the approved plan expressly preserves th...
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.