The accused denied bail over alleged GST credential misuse to commit Rs.1,09,11,404 fraud involving multiple proprietorships; investigation to continu...
Page of 4826
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
9701 to 9720 of 96510 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
ITAT dismissed the revenue's appeal, upholding the Tribunal's and CIT(A)'s findings that the assessee is entitled to deduction under section 54 in respect of the new residential property despite joint acquisition with a son-in-law, because the AO's 50% restriction was not substantiated and the amount of investment was undisputed. The Tribunal further upheld the cost of acquisition adopted by the assessee, accepting the valuation report and noting consistency with stamp duty valuation as of 01.04.2001, finding no contravention of the proviso to section 55(2)(b). Consequently the AO's adjustments were overturned and the impugned assessment was restored in favour of the assessee.
ITAT dismissed the revenue's appeal, upholding the Tribunal's and CIT(A)'s findings that the assessee is entitled to deduction under section 54 in respect of the new residential property despite joint acquisition with a son-in-law, because the AO's 50% restriction was not substantiated and the amount of investment was undisputed. The Tribunal further upheld the cost of acquisition adopted by the assessee, accepting the valuation report and noting consistency with stamp duty valuation as of 01.04.2001, finding no contravention of the proviso to section 55(2)(b). Consequently the AO's adjustments were overturned and the impugned assessment was restored in favour of the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.