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 upholds CIT(A)'s factual finding that the assessee's current-year loss of Rs.2.38 crore constituted unabsorbed depreciation, not business loss, and therefore is eligible for carry-forward after set-off against income from house property, capital gains and other sources. The Departmental Representative conceded the factual finding; Revenue's ground challenging that finding was held to be without merit. ITAT further held that, under s.32(2) read with s.80, the assessee need not specifically claim unabsorbed depreciation in a return filed under s.139(1) to carry it forward, and consequently the appeal by Revenue fails and the assessees' entitlement to carry-forward unabsorbed depreciation is affirmed.
ITAT upholds CIT(A)'s factual finding that the assessee's current-year loss of Rs.2.38 crore constituted unabsorbed depreciation, not business loss, and therefore is eligible for carry-forward after set-off against income from house property, capital gains and other sources. The Departmental Representative conceded the factual finding; Revenue's ground challenging that finding was held to be without merit. ITAT further held that, under s.32(2) read with s.80, the assessee need not specifically claim unabsorbed depreciation in a return filed under s.139(1) to carry it forward, and consequently the appeal by Revenue fails and the assessees' entitlement to carry-forward unabsorbed depreciation is affirmed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.