Political contribution deductions require assessee-specific proof before cash-back allegations can justify disallowance or unexplained-money additions...
ITAT upheld taxpayer's claim for LTCG deduction u/s 54F despite delayed possession of new property. While assessee made full payment exceeding capital gains within prescribed time, builder failed to deliver possession within statutory period. ITAT emphasized that beneficial provisions like Section 54/54F should be interpreted liberally when taxpayer fulfills obligations but faces delays beyond their control. Tribunal noted widespread construction delays by builders affecting numerous taxpayers and ruled substantial payment and domain over property sufficient for exemption, even without formal possession or registration within deadline. Following SC precedent in Sanjeev Lal case, ITAT concluded adverse inference cannot be drawn against assessee who demonstrated compliance with statutory conditions despite builder's default.
ITAT upheld taxpayer's claim for LTCG deduction u/s 54F despite delayed possession of new property. While assessee made full payment exceeding capital gains within prescribed time, builder failed to deliver possession within statutory period. ITAT emphasized that beneficial provisions like Section 54/54F should be interpreted liberally when taxpayer fulfills obligations but faces delays beyond their control. Tribunal noted widespread construction delays by builders affecting numerous taxpayers and ruled substantial payment and domain over property sufficient for exemption, even without formal possession or registration within deadline. Following SC precedent in Sanjeev Lal case, ITAT concluded adverse inference cannot be drawn against assessee who demonstrated compliance with statutory conditions despite builder's default.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
Join Channel 
