Governmental authority status supports construction-service exemption, while pre-cutoff contract and stamp-duty compliance requires verification on re...
Automated Free Sale and Commerce Certificates enable paperless processing while retaining risk-based manual verification for selected exporter applica...
Employee stock-shortage penalties do not constitute consideration for services, preventing GST collection under Schedule II in employment relationship...
HC dismissed the assessee's challenge and upheld the concurrent findings of the AO, CIT(A) and ITAT that the premises' annual value under s.23 was Rs.22,00,000. The court held the assessee could not rely on developer/society letters not pressed before the tribunal and had failed to prove any municipal rateable value; the doctrine of standard rent was inapplicable as no statutory tenancy under rent control existed. The AO permissibly conducted an independent enquiry, considering comparable instances, overdraft return and the usufructual effect of a substantial security deposit; notional interest alone could not determine annual value. Decision against the assessee.
HC dismissed the assessee's challenge and upheld the concurrent findings of the AO, CIT(A) and ITAT that the premises' annual value under s.23 was Rs.22,00,000. The court held the assessee could not rely on developer/society letters not pressed before the tribunal and had failed to prove any municipal rateable value; the doctrine of standard rent was inapplicable as no statutory tenancy under rent control existed. The AO permissibly conducted an independent enquiry, considering comparable instances, overdraft return and the usufructual effect of a substantial security deposit; notional interest alone could not determine annual value. Decision against the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
