Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
A Government company wholly controlled by the State Government through the Governor, with power to appoint and remove directors, was treated as eligible for exemption under section 10(26B) on the basis of its incorporation documents and memorandum and articles of association. The Tribunal followed the co-ordinate bench view in the assessee's own case and accepted that the company was established by the State, so its income was exempt. As the Revenue did not dispute the foundational facts and only raised res judicata, the Tribunal found no error in deleting the additions as non-taxable and upheld the exemption.
A Government company wholly controlled by the State Government through the Governor, with power to appoint and remove directors, was treated as eligible for exemption under section 10(26B) on the basis of its incorporation documents and memorandum and articles of association. The Tribunal followed the co-ordinate bench view in the assessee's own case and accepted that the company was established by the State, so its income was exempt. As the Revenue did not dispute the foundational facts and only raised res judicata, the Tribunal found no error in deleting the additions as non-taxable and upheld the exemption.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.