Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
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.