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 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.