Faceless reassessment jurisdiction turned on retrospective AO definition, with later faceless-assessment changes treated as clarificatory and procedur...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
2121 to 2140 of 96100 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
ITAT held that deduction under section 54F could not be denied merely because the residential house was purchased from close relatives or because the Revenue suspected a colourable device. The sale of shares and purchase of the flat were supported by contemporaneous material, including demat records, a registered purchase agreement, developer confirmation, and post-purchase utility records in the assessee's name; the use of a power of attorney for execution of the deed was also not questioned by the registering authority. As the transactions remained undislodged by cogent evidence, the Tribunal treated the arrangement as permissible tax planning within the legal framework and directed deletion of the addition.
ITAT held that deduction under section 54F could not be denied merely because the residential house was purchased from close relatives or because the Revenue suspected a colourable device. The sale of shares and purchase of the flat were supported by contemporaneous material, including demat records, a registered purchase agreement, developer confirmation, and post-purchase utility records in the assessee's name; the use of a power of attorney for execution of the deed was also not questioned by the registering authority. As the transactions remained undislodged by cogent evidence, the Tribunal treated the arrangement as permissible tax planning within the legal framework and directed deletion of the addition.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
