Transfer-pricing aggregation of distinct support-service and subcontract transactions was rejected, while debt-free receivables attracted no notional ...
Customs exemptions cover photovoltaic assembly machinery and PVF backsheets, while fully declared cleared imports may avoid confiscation and penalties...
Specific tariff classification for LCD devices overrides treatment as electricity-meter parts, defeating differential duty, extended limitation, and p...
Stayed disciplinary punishment does not establish unfitness for insolvency professional registration; reconsideration must disregard mere pendency of ...
Indirect corporate control can create related-party status, excluding financial creditors from Committee of Creditors representation, participation an...
Page of 4881
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
101 to 120 of 97618 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
HC held that the expenditure incurred by the appellant to clear title of a disputed property constitutes a cost directly connected with the asset transfer under Section 48. The payment was deemed 'wholly and exclusively' incurred in connection with the property transfer, as the title was initially clouded and litigation existed between original vendors and their sisters. The court found that without such payment, the property transfer could not have been executed, effectively treating the amount as integral to the sale consideration. The expenditure was therefore allowable as part of the cost of acquisition for long-term capital gains computation, ultimately deciding in favor of the assessee.
HC held that the expenditure incurred by the appellant to clear title of a disputed property constitutes a cost directly connected with the asset transfer under Section 48. The payment was deemed 'wholly and exclusively' incurred in connection with the property transfer, as the title was initially clouded and litigation existed between original vendors and their sisters. The court found that without such payment, the property transfer could not have been executed, effectively treating the amount as integral to the sale consideration. The expenditure was therefore allowable as part of the cost of acquisition for long-term capital gains computation, ultimately deciding in favor of the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.