Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
Dividend income was treated at processing as falling under s.10(34) and taxed beyond ₹10 lakh by applying s.115BBDA on the premise that it arose from domestic companies. On evidence showing the dividend was from mutual funds and was necessarily reported in Schedule EI without bifurcation, the Tribunal held that such income squarely falls under s.10(35) and is fully exempt, rendering s.115BBDA inapplicable; the corresponding addition was deleted. On the claimed capital loss, since the first appellate authority had directed verification and allowance if found correct and the supporting documents were on record, no interference was warranted and the ground was allowed for statistical purposes. - ITAT
Dividend income was treated at processing as falling under s.10(34) and taxed beyond ₹10 lakh by applying s.115BBDA on the premise that it arose from domestic companies. On evidence showing the dividend was from mutual funds and was necessarily reported in Schedule EI without bifurcation, the Tribunal held that such income squarely falls under s.10(35) and is fully exempt, rendering s.115BBDA inapplicable; the corresponding addition was deleted. On the claimed capital loss, since the first appellate authority had directed verification and allowance if found correct and the supporting documents were on record, no interference was warranted and the ground was allowed for statistical purposes. - ITAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
