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...
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 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
