Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
Mutual fund maturity rules require proper rollover, redemption, disclosure, and due diligence; investor gains cannot excuse regulatory breaches or pen...
Threshold exemption excludes exempt services, while stamp-paper purchases avoid reverse charge; consequential service tax penalties were also set asid...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1381 to 1400 of 96174 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4809 
Join Channel 
