Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
Mutual fund maturity rules require proper rollover, redemption, disclosure, and due diligence; investor gains cannot excuse regulatory breaches or pen...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1381 to 1400 of 96177 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Deduction under section 10A was allowed as an alternate claim even though the return had originally claimed section 10B, because Form 56F was furnished during assessment and the same units had already been allowed section 10A relief in earlier scrutiny years; in the absence of any material showing those earlier allowances were or revised, the Revenue could not deny eligibility in the later year. The Tribunal also held that the assessee failed to show that the assessment order was without jurisdiction, while the jurisdiction order under section 120 was on record, so the jurisdictional objection had no merit. The Revenue's appeal was rejected and the cross-objection was dismissed.
Deduction under section 10A was allowed as an alternate claim even though the return had originally claimed section 10B, because Form 56F was furnished during assessment and the same units had already been allowed section 10A relief in earlier scrutiny years; in the absence of any material showing those earlier allowances were or revised, the Revenue could not deny eligibility in the later year. The Tribunal also held that the assessee failed to show that the assessment order was without jurisdiction, while the jurisdiction order under section 120 was on record, so the jurisdictional objection had no merit. The Revenue's appeal was rejected and the cross-objection was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.