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 96176 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Section 54F was construed as a beneficial provision whose substance is timely investment of capital gains in a residential house, and the Tribunal held that exemption could not be denied where that substantive requirement was met. The assessee's investment was found genuine and the discrepancy in the flat number was explained by developer records, which the Revenue did not rebut. Non-deposit of the unutilised amount in the Capital Gain Account Scheme before the due date under section 139(1) was treated as a technical lapse only, so the deduction was allowed in full and the capital gains addition was deleted.
Section 54F was construed as a beneficial provision whose substance is timely investment of capital gains in a residential house, and the Tribunal held that exemption could not be denied where that substantive requirement was met. The assessee's investment was found genuine and the discrepancy in the flat number was explained by developer records, which the Revenue did not rebut. Non-deposit of the unutilised amount in the Capital Gain Account Scheme before the due date under section 139(1) was treated as a technical lapse only, so the deduction was allowed in full and the capital gains addition was deleted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.