Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is establ...
Reassessment jurisdiction fails where unverified portal information is aggregated without examining the taxpayer's explanation or relevance of entries...
Statutory sanction for delayed reassessment requires approval from the prescribed authority; approval by an inferior authority invalidates jurisdictio...
Transfer pricing margin adjustments require matching treatment of non-operating income and related costs, with comparability issues reconsidered on ev...
Preliminary-expense amortisation and MAT exempt-income adjustments prevailed, while trademark costs and managerial remuneration require fresh verifica...
Page of 4819
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
501 to 520 of 96365 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Where a civil court had already declared the registered sale deed void for fraud and non-payment of consideration, no capital gain could be attributed to the assessee merely because the Revenue's appeal against that decree was pending. The ITAT noted that the Assessing Officer made no inquiry with the purchasers about payment of consideration or the source of investment, and no material showed that any sale proceeds were actually received by the assessee. On these facts, a valid transfer and receipt of consideration were absent, so no long-term capital gain arose even on a protective basis. The protective addition was deleted.
Where a civil court had already declared the registered sale deed void for fraud and non-payment of consideration, no capital gain could be attributed to the assessee merely because the Revenue's appeal against that decree was pending. The ITAT noted that the Assessing Officer made no inquiry with the purchasers about payment of consideration or the source of investment, and no material showed that any sale proceeds were actually received by the assessee. On these facts, a valid transfer and receipt of consideration were absent, so no long-term capital gain arose even on a protective basis. The protective addition was deleted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.