Electronic certificates of origin enable preferential tariffs under the India-New Zealand FTA when format, verification, and filing requirements are m...
Customs approval for liquid cargo exports extends designated jetty operations while existing boarding station and customs area limits remain unchanged...
Mandatory compliance document verification now conditions out-of-charge clearance for imported cosmetics, drugs, and medical devices through PGA-facil...
Double taxation of turnover requires holistic verification across separately registered units and permits limited rectification of overlapping assessm...
ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal regarding disallowance of loss on Amritsar real estate project. Lower authorities erroneously determined the loss crystallized in AY 2010-11, but ITAT found disputes between parties continued until compromise deed dated 20-7-2012, making AY 2012-13 the correct year for crystallization. The Tribunal noted documentary evidence in Supplementary Paper Book demonstrated ongoing disputes post-2009. ITAT concluded the loss properly crystallized on 20-7-2012 when disputes were finally resolved through compromise deed. The Tribunal emphasized tax rates remained consistent across relevant assessment years, citing precedent that revenue suffers no prejudice when tax rates are uniform, making the timing dispute academic. The assessee's explanation for claiming deduction in AY 2012-13 was accepted as convincing.
ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal regarding disallowance of loss on Amritsar real estate project. Lower authorities erroneously determined the loss crystallized in AY 2010-11, but ITAT found disputes between parties continued until compromise deed dated 20-7-2012, making AY 2012-13 the correct year for crystallization. The Tribunal noted documentary evidence in Supplementary Paper Book demonstrated ongoing disputes post-2009. ITAT concluded the loss properly crystallized on 20-7-2012 when disputes were finally resolved through compromise deed. The Tribunal emphasized tax rates remained consistent across relevant assessment years, citing precedent that revenue suffers no prejudice when tax rates are uniform, making the timing dispute academic. The assessee's explanation for claiming deduction in AY 2012-13 was accepted as convincing.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
