Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
The High Court examined whether the assessee had constructed a residential house on agricultural land within the stipulated three-year period from the date of transfer of property to claim deduction u/s 54. The court held that the allowance is available if capital gains from the sale of a residential property are utilized for purchasing a residential property or constructing a residential house, implying raising a construction for inhabitation as a residential dwelling unit. The Inspector's report accepted by the ITAT revealed only makeshift guardrooms made of plywood sheets without electricity or water connection on the site. The court opined that putting together plywood sheets cannot be construed as constructing a residential house. The ITAT's findings were not perverse or manifestly erroneous, considering the description of the property. Therefore, no question of law arose for the court's consideration.
The High Court examined whether the assessee had constructed a residential house on agricultural land within the stipulated three-year period from the date of transfer of property to claim deduction u/s 54. The court held that the allowance is available if capital gains from the sale of a residential property are utilized for purchasing a residential property or constructing a residential house, implying raising a construction for inhabitation as a residential dwelling unit. The Inspector's report accepted by the ITAT revealed only makeshift guardrooms made of plywood sheets without electricity or water connection on the site. The court opined that putting together plywood sheets cannot be construed as constructing a residential house. The ITAT's findings were not perverse or manifestly erroneous, considering the description of the property. Therefore, no question of law arose for the court's consideration.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.