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...
Assessee's entitlement to exemption under s.54F: (1) Whether assessee owned more than one residential house-AO's finding that a vacant/industrial land with leased factory constituted a residential house was factually erroneous; land at 13 BT Road was non-residential and excluded from proviso sub-clause (i), therefore no disqualification - exemption allowed on this point. (2) Whether jointly held family property precluded s.54F - joint co-ownership meant the proviso's exclusivity test was not satisfied and did not bar the claim - exemption allowed. (3) Whether use of sale proceeds/colourable device/clubbing u/s 64 applied - no requirement to directly deploy sale proceeds; gift/clubbing allegation rejected on facts and cultural motive; exemption upheld. - ITAT
Assessee's entitlement to exemption under s.54F: (1) Whether assessee owned more than one residential house-AO's finding that a vacant/industrial land with leased factory constituted a residential house was factually erroneous; land at 13 BT Road was non-residential and excluded from proviso sub-clause (i), therefore no disqualification - exemption allowed on this point. (2) Whether jointly held family property precluded s.54F - joint co-ownership meant the proviso's exclusivity test was not satisfied and did not bar the claim - exemption allowed. (3) Whether use of sale proceeds/colourable device/clubbing u/s 64 applied - no requirement to directly deploy sale proceeds; gift/clubbing allegation rejected on facts and cultural motive; exemption upheld. - ITAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
