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 adjudicated on the following issues: 1. Cost of acquisition for computing long-term capital gains on sale of ancestral agricultural land: The assessee's valuation report was found unreliable. The matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer to refer it to the District Valuation Officer (DVO) to determine the correct market value as on 01.04.1981, after considering the assessee's objections. 2. Denial of deduction u/s 54F for purchase of new residential property: The ITAT upheld the disallowance, as the assessee failed to establish that a residential house was purchased within the stipulated time. 3. Date of acquisition of new property for Section 54F: The ITAT accepted the assessee's contention that the investment date should be considered as 26.07.2017, when the agreement was executed and full payment was made, despite delayed registration. 4. Addition for unexplained cash deposits in bank account: The ITAT treated cash deposits up to Rs. 15.48 lakhs as explained from agricultural income but confirmed the addition of Rs. 9 lakhs for unexplained cash deposits during demonetization.
The ITAT adjudicated on the following issues: 1. Cost of acquisition for computing long-term capital gains on sale of ancestral agricultural land: The assessee's valuation report was found unreliable. The matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer to refer it to the District Valuation Officer (DVO) to determine the correct market value as on 01.04.1981, after considering the assessee's objections. 2. Denial of deduction u/s 54F for purchase of new residential property: The ITAT upheld the disallowance, as the assessee failed to establish that a residential house was purchased within the stipulated time. 3. Date of acquisition of new property for Section 54F: The ITAT accepted the assessee's contention that the investment date should be considered as 26.07.2017, when the agreement was executed and full payment was made, despite delayed registration. 4. Addition for unexplained cash deposits in bank account: The ITAT treated cash deposits up to Rs. 15.48 lakhs as explained from agricultural income but confirmed the addition of Rs. 9 lakhs for unexplained cash deposits during demonetization.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
