Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Customs Cargo Service Provider appointment extends custodianship to additional terminal land, subject to cargo-control, security and licence condition...
ITAT upheld the AO and CIT(A)'s adoption of the stamp duty value of Rs.67,14,284 as full value of consideration under s.50C, finding no infirmity and noting no request for DVO reference. On s.54 exemption, ITAT accepted in principle the assessee's asserted 2:1 contribution ratio to the new residential property and directed the AO to verify actual contributions of the assessee and spouse and grant exemption proportionately if substantiated. Regarding indexed cost of improvements, ITAT found the absence of bank entry not determinative given the antiquity of the works and directed the AO to allow the claimed indexed improvement cost if contractor bills and supporting evidence credibly establish payment.
ITAT upheld the AO and CIT(A)'s adoption of the stamp duty value of Rs.67,14,284 as full value of consideration under s.50C, finding no infirmity and noting no request for DVO reference. On s.54 exemption, ITAT accepted in principle the assessee's asserted 2:1 contribution ratio to the new residential property and directed the AO to verify actual contributions of the assessee and spouse and grant exemption proportionately if substantiated. Regarding indexed cost of improvements, ITAT found the absence of bank entry not determinative given the antiquity of the works and directed the AO to allow the claimed indexed improvement cost if contractor bills and supporting evidence credibly establish payment.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.