Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Customs Cargo Service Provider appointment extends custodianship to additional terminal land, subject to cargo-control, security and licence condition...
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.