Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Limitation in oppression and mismanagement proceedings: prior knowledge of removal and dilution barred the challenge, with valuation directions upheld...
ITAT held that deduction under section 54 could not be denied on technical or documentary objections where the record showed substantial investment in construction of a residential house and utilisation of capital gains for that purpose. It accepted the Joint Development Agreement and expenditure evidence as sufficient, noting no specific defect or adverse finding on genuineness, and applied a liberal construction to this beneficial exemption provision. The disallowance was deleted. On Chapter VI-A claims under sections 80C and 80D, the Tribunal upheld the direction to verify the supporting documents and allow the admissible deduction in accordance with law.
ITAT held that deduction under section 54 could not be denied on technical or documentary objections where the record showed substantial investment in construction of a residential house and utilisation of capital gains for that purpose. It accepted the Joint Development Agreement and expenditure evidence as sufficient, noting no specific defect or adverse finding on genuineness, and applied a liberal construction to this beneficial exemption provision. The disallowance was deleted. On Chapter VI-A claims under sections 80C and 80D, the Tribunal upheld the direction to verify the supporting documents and allow the admissible deduction in accordance with law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
