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...
In a LTCG computation case, the ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal regarding disallowance of improvement costs on a property transfer. The tribunal held that payments made to the original seller, the developer (Jayabheri Properties), and contractor (Nagabasi Reddy) should be included in cost of acquisition/improvement. The AO and DRP had rejected these claims because some payments weren't mentioned in the sale deed and the contractor's bill lacked VAT registration. The ITAT reasoned that cheque payments with confirmation from recipients established the genuineness of transactions, ruling that proper evidence had been furnished to prove these payments were legitimate property costs for LTCG calculation purposes.
In a LTCG computation case, the ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal regarding disallowance of improvement costs on a property transfer. The tribunal held that payments made to the original seller, the developer (Jayabheri Properties), and contractor (Nagabasi Reddy) should be included in cost of acquisition/improvement. The AO and DRP had rejected these claims because some payments weren't mentioned in the sale deed and the contractor's bill lacked VAT registration. The ITAT reasoned that cheque payments with confirmation from recipients established the genuineness of transactions, ruling that proper evidence had been furnished to prove these payments were legitimate property costs for LTCG calculation purposes.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.