Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
Depreciation was denied on conversion charges paid for change of land use because the expenditure related to land owned by another entity and did not create any independent depreciable asset in the assessee's hands; Explanation 1 to section 32 was held confined to capital expenditure on a building or work connected with a building, not land or rights in land. The alternative claim for revenue deduction and the related interest claim also failed because the assessee did not own the underlying asset and the business-purpose nexus required for section 36(1)(iii) was not established. Penalty was deleted under section 271(1)(c) since the claim was fully disclosed and debatable, with no concealment or inaccurate particulars.
Depreciation was denied on conversion charges paid for change of land use because the expenditure related to land owned by another entity and did not create any independent depreciable asset in the assessee's hands; Explanation 1 to section 32 was held confined to capital expenditure on a building or work connected with a building, not land or rights in land. The alternative claim for revenue deduction and the related interest claim also failed because the assessee did not own the underlying asset and the business-purpose nexus required for section 36(1)(iii) was not established. Penalty was deleted under section 271(1)(c) since the claim was fully disclosed and debatable, with no concealment or inaccurate particulars.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4814 
Join Channel 
