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 dismissed the revenue's appeal regarding classification of rental income under correct head of income. The assessee had treated rental income as business income rather than house property income while filing returns. The Coordinate Bench in assessee's own case for A.Y. 2011-12 previously held that assessee's rental income was assessable as "Income from Business." The Departmental Representative conceded that facts and circumstances for the current year were identical to A.Y. 2011-12, which was decided in assessee's favor. ITAT found no infirmity in CIT(A)'s order allowing the assessee to classify rental income as business income instead of house property income, upholding the lower authority's decision against the revenue.
ITAT dismissed the revenue's appeal regarding classification of rental income under correct head of income. The assessee had treated rental income as business income rather than house property income while filing returns. The Coordinate Bench in assessee's own case for A.Y. 2011-12 previously held that assessee's rental income was assessable as "Income from Business." The Departmental Representative conceded that facts and circumstances for the current year were identical to A.Y. 2011-12, which was decided in assessee's favor. ITAT found no infirmity in CIT(A)'s order allowing the assessee to classify rental income as business income instead of house property income, upholding the lower authority's decision against the revenue.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
