Benami transaction and beneficial ownership: documentary and circumstantial evidence show payors were true beneficiaries, resulting in PBPTA consequen...
Denial of Preferential Treatment under SAFTA overturned where unchallenged Country of Origin certificate warranted exemption under Notification benefi...
Section 54F relief was held available where sale consideration was invested in a residential house before filing the return under section 139(4), so deposit in the capital gains account was not required. The Tribunal also held that an undivided one-third share in a single contiguous residential property did not amount to ownership of two separate houses, so the assessee was not disentitled on that ground. It further ruled that section 54F must be applied asset-wise: shares of each company were separate capital assets, and long-term capital loss could not be used to deny exemption on gains from other assets.
Section 54F relief was held available where sale consideration was invested in a residential house before filing the return under section 139(4), so deposit in the capital gains account was not required. The Tribunal also held that an undivided one-third share in a single contiguous residential property did not amount to ownership of two separate houses, so the assessee was not disentitled on that ground. It further ruled that section 54F must be applied asset-wise: shares of each company were separate capital assets, and long-term capital loss could not be used to deny exemption on gains from other assets.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4826 
Join Channel 
