Service of notice and contractual debt acknowledgment preserved insolvency admission against a corporate guarantor despite limitation and natural just...
Original works exemption excludes standalone boulder transportation, leaving subcontracted railway-project transport services subject to service tax l...
Annual production capacity determinations excluding stenter galleries support refunds for unconstitutional excise levies without an unjust-enrichment ...
Vicarious liability for cheque dishonour requires specific allegations of responsibility and cheque signatory; generic director allegations cannot sus...
IT Resilience Index requires market infrastructure institutions to automate resilience scoring, early warnings, and continuous service-delivery monito...
ITAT allowed appellant's claim for deduction under section 54 of the Income Tax Act, holding that filing the claim in the original or revised return is not mandatory for availing such deduction. The tribunal found that appellant purchased Delhi property for Rs.22,30,000 one year prior to selling Lucknow property, generating long-term capital gains of Rs.17,13,015. Since the purchase cost exceeded the capital gains amount, full deduction was permissible under sections 45(1) and 54(1)(ii). The addition made by AO and confirmed by CIT(A) was deleted. Regarding addition under section 56(2)(vii)(b) for difference between stamp value and sale consideration, ITAT granted relief of Rs.86,66,666 but made it subject to pending High Court proceedings regarding validity of the 2005 agreement to sell the Delhi property.
ITAT allowed appellant's claim for deduction under section 54 of the Income Tax Act, holding that filing the claim in the original or revised return is not mandatory for availing such deduction. The tribunal found that appellant purchased Delhi property for Rs.22,30,000 one year prior to selling Lucknow property, generating long-term capital gains of Rs.17,13,015. Since the purchase cost exceeded the capital gains amount, full deduction was permissible under sections 45(1) and 54(1)(ii). The addition made by AO and confirmed by CIT(A) was deleted. Regarding addition under section 56(2)(vii)(b) for difference between stamp value and sale consideration, ITAT granted relief of Rs.86,66,666 but made it subject to pending High Court proceedings regarding validity of the 2005 agreement to sell the Delhi property.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.