Educational approval requires mandatory State registration, but incidental surplus and trustee-owned land do not prove private benefit or profit motiv...
Judicial review of settlement orders cannot reopen settled customs notices, while statutory interest remains subject to verification and quantificatio...
Customs Broker licence lending for consideration justified revocation where exporter authorisation and client verification obligations were also breac...
Fraudulent import documents suspend limitation protection, while redemption of confiscated goods requires duty and interest despite bona fide purchase...
ODR arbitration participation remains mandatory after failed conciliation, while jurisdictional and maintainability objections stay available before t...
Transparency in technical bid evaluation requires disclosed standards and recorded reasons; opaque scoring invalidated tender awards and required fres...
Automated export obligation extensions remove separate regional applications after committee approval for Advance Authorisation and EPCG authorisation...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
441 to 460 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Land held as stock-in-trade in a property development business was outside the scope of section 50C, because that provision applies only to transfer of a capital asset. The Tribunal found that the development agreement, power of attorney, revenue records and balance sheets showed the assessee was acting as a land developer and had not acquired title to the entire parcel. It also noted that the same transaction had already been disclosed as business turnover and accepted as business income, so applying capital gains treatment again would amount to impermissible double taxation. The addition as long-term capital gain was deleted.
Land held as stock-in-trade in a property development business was outside the scope of section 50C, because that provision applies only to transfer of a capital asset. The Tribunal found that the development agreement, power of attorney, revenue records and balance sheets showed the assessee was acting as a land developer and had not acquired title to the entire parcel. It also noted that the same transaction had already been disclosed as business turnover and accepted as business income, so applying capital gains treatment again would amount to impermissible double taxation. The addition as long-term capital gain was deleted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.