Necessary-party requirements limit impleadment of independent entities, while deferred consideration does not create an appealable adverse determinati...
Food supplement classification requires common parlance and authoritative tests, preventing treatment as proprietary Ayurvedic medicines without suppo...
Specified regulatory authority income receives conditional tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income character, and return f...
Tax exemption for regulatory authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-filing...
Input tax credit conditions remain constitutionally valid, with eligible recipient claims considered under GST circulars and retrospective filing dead...
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.