Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
Page of 4786
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
241 to 260 of 95715 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The ITAT held that the lease/rental income of the assessee company constitutes business income, as leasing the property is a principal object and the sole source of income, contrary to the assessee's return characterizing it as income from house property. The Tribunal rejected the argument based on the rule of consistency, emphasizing that a claim inconsistent with admitted facts and settled law cannot be perpetuated merely due to non-disturbance by the AO. Consequently, the CIT(A)'s order was set aside, and the AO's order restored. Regarding the disallowance of expenses related to the lease income, the matter was remanded to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits, since the CIT(A) had not addressed this issue after altering the income classification.
The ITAT held that the lease/rental income of the assessee company constitutes business income, as leasing the property is a principal object and the sole source of income, contrary to the assessee's return characterizing it as income from house property. The Tribunal rejected the argument based on the rule of consistency, emphasizing that a claim inconsistent with admitted facts and settled law cannot be perpetuated merely due to non-disturbance by the AO. Consequently, the CIT(A)'s order was set aside, and the AO's order restored. Regarding the disallowance of expenses related to the lease income, the matter was remanded to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits, since the CIT(A) had not addressed this issue after altering the income classification.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4786
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
