ESOP expenditure allowed as FMV difference; long-term capital gain issue sent back for collector rate determination; deferred income additions disallo...
Appeal allowed; impugned order quashed as regulator failed to prove nexus or manipulative scheme; sale genuine - s.12A(a)-(c), Regs 3(a)-(d),4(1),4(2)...
Appellant's ring-back tone service held OIDAR, taxable domestically for 01.07.2012-31.07.2016; liability confirmed, penalties vacated, remanded for re...
Page of 4830
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
9361 to 9380 of 96587 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The ITAT allowed the appeal, holding that the resident individual assessee, having opted for taxation under section 115BAC(1A) and whose total income for AY 2024-25 did not exceed Rs. 7,00,000, is entitled to rebate under section 87A. It held that neither section 87A nor section 111A contains any express prohibition against allowing rebate on tax payable on STCG taxable under section 111A. The Tribunal noted that denial of rebate by CPC, Bengaluru, was based on system-driven logic without statutory backing. The proposed prospective amendment in Finance Bill 2025 was treated as clarificatory of prior legislative intent.
The ITAT allowed the appeal, holding that the resident individual assessee, having opted for taxation under section 115BAC(1A) and whose total income for AY 2024-25 did not exceed Rs. 7,00,000, is entitled to rebate under section 87A. It held that neither section 87A nor section 111A contains any express prohibition against allowing rebate on tax payable on STCG taxable under section 111A. The Tribunal noted that denial of rebate by CPC, Bengaluru, was based on system-driven logic without statutory backing. The proposed prospective amendment in Finance Bill 2025 was treated as clarificatory of prior legislative intent.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.