Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
ITAT held that, under S.32 read with S.43(6)(c) and Rule 5, depreciation is governed by the "block of assets" concept and the individual identity of a depreciable asset is extinguished once it forms part of the block. In the case of Assessee X, the motor car was part of the "Motor Cars" block (15%), and the sale consideration of Rs. 5,60,000 had already been reduced from the block while computing depreciation in the return. ITAT held that no separate taxable profit arises on sale of an individual asset within the block and that taxing the book profit of Rs. 4,83,894 amounted to impermissible double taxation. As the AO cited no enabling provision and CIT(A) gave no cogent reasoning, the addition was deleted. Appeal allowed in favour of Assessee X.
ITAT held that, under S.32 read with S.43(6)(c) and Rule 5, depreciation is governed by the "block of assets" concept and the individual identity of a depreciable asset is extinguished once it forms part of the block. In the case of Assessee X, the motor car was part of the "Motor Cars" block (15%), and the sale consideration of Rs. 5,60,000 had already been reduced from the block while computing depreciation in the return. ITAT held that no separate taxable profit arises on sale of an individual asset within the block and that taxing the book profit of Rs. 4,83,894 amounted to impermissible double taxation. As the AO cited no enabling provision and CIT(A) gave no cogent reasoning, the addition was deleted. Appeal allowed in favour of Assessee X.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.