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 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.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
