PMLA anticipatory bail requires satisfaction of twin conditions, while predicate-offence protection does not extend to independent money-laundering pr...
School-affiliation charges remain taxable where not directly connected with examinations, while extended limitation requires proof of deliberate tax e...
ITAT allowed the appellant's appeal, holding that the ULIP constitutes a "capital asset" within s.2(14)(a) for the relevant assessment year, because the insurance policy did not attract s.10(10D) exemption. Consequently, the received amount must be treated for capital gains/loss computation rather than as income from other sources. The Tribunal rejected the coordinate-bench rationale limiting capital-asset treatment to amendments effective w.e.f. 2021, and directed consequential computation of capital gains/loss in accordance with tax law. Matter remitted for arithmetic determination consistent with this legal characterization; appeal allowed.
ITAT allowed the appellant's appeal, holding that the ULIP constitutes a "capital asset" within s.2(14)(a) for the relevant assessment year, because the insurance policy did not attract s.10(10D) exemption. Consequently, the received amount must be treated for capital gains/loss computation rather than as income from other sources. The Tribunal rejected the coordinate-bench rationale limiting capital-asset treatment to amendments effective w.e.f. 2021, and directed consequential computation of capital gains/loss in accordance with tax law. Matter remitted for arithmetic determination consistent with this legal characterization; appeal allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.