Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
HC held that in cases of company liquidation, Sections 46(2), 49(1)(iii)(c), and 55(2)(b)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are applicable for computing capital gains. The unique circumstance involved two transactions within the same financial year: share transfer resulting in asset distribution and subsequent asset sale. The court found the Tribunal's procedural approach incorrect, particularly in not referring the matter to a larger bench. The computation methodology for cost of acquisition was determined by analyzing both transactions comprehensively. Ultimately, the decision was rendered against the revenue, favoring the assessee's interpretation of the statutory provisions.
HC held that in cases of company liquidation, Sections 46(2), 49(1)(iii)(c), and 55(2)(b)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are applicable for computing capital gains. The unique circumstance involved two transactions within the same financial year: share transfer resulting in asset distribution and subsequent asset sale. The court found the Tribunal's procedural approach incorrect, particularly in not referring the matter to a larger bench. The computation methodology for cost of acquisition was determined by analyzing both transactions comprehensively. Ultimately, the decision was rendered against the revenue, favoring the assessee's interpretation of the statutory provisions.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.