Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
The ITAT held that the assessee bank was eligible for deduction u/s 36(1)(viia) for its rural branches. The Assessing Officer had erroneously rejected the rural branch status for five branches based on district-wise data from the 2011 Census. However, the assessee appropriately relied on the final village-wise data from the 2001 Census to claim the deduction, as the 2011 Census lacked village-level population figures. The ITAT found no error in the impugned appellate order allowing the deduction and dismissed the revenue's appeal.
The ITAT held that the assessee bank was eligible for deduction u/s 36(1)(viia) for its rural branches. The Assessing Officer had erroneously rejected the rural branch status for five branches based on district-wise data from the 2011 Census. However, the assessee appropriately relied on the final village-wise data from the 2001 Census to claim the deduction, as the 2011 Census lacked village-level population figures. The ITAT found no error in the impugned appellate order allowing the deduction and dismissed the revenue's appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.