Commercial vehicle depreciation, scientifically determined warranty provisions and exempt-income disallowances were resolved in favour of the taxpayer...
Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Section 79 did not bar the set off of brought forward business losses where the persons beneficially holding more than 51% of the voting power continued to hold that voting power on the relevant date; on the uncontroverted facts, the disqualifying change in shareholding was absent and the Revenue's challenge failed. An appellate authority could also entertain a lawful additional depreciation claim raised through a revised computation, because the restriction in Goetze (India) Ltd. applies only to the Assessing Officer and does not limit appellate powers. The Tribunal upheld allowance of both claims and dismissed the Revenue's appeal.
Section 79 did not bar the set off of brought forward business losses where the persons beneficially holding more than 51% of the voting power continued to hold that voting power on the relevant date; on the uncontroverted facts, the disqualifying change in shareholding was absent and the Revenue's challenge failed. An appellate authority could also entertain a lawful additional depreciation claim raised through a revised computation, because the restriction in Goetze (India) Ltd. applies only to the Assessing Officer and does not limit appellate powers. The Tribunal upheld allowance of both claims and dismissed the Revenue's appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.