https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274078 Revenue appeals were held not maintainable for assessment years where the tax effect fell below the prescribed monetary limit, because the threshold had to be applied year-wise even though the first appellate order was common to multiple years. The composite-order exception could not defeat the monetary-limit benefit for individual years with low tax effect. For assessment year 2013-14, the real estate business was treated as set up upon acquisition of land for development, so the revenue expenditure incurred after that stage and the resulting business loss were allowable. The low-tax-effect appeals were dismissed and the remaining challenge failed on merits. en-us Wed, 11 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 27 Jul 2018 10:42:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274078 Revenue appeals were held not maintainable for assessment years where the tax effect fell below the prescribed monetary limit, because the threshold had to be applied year-wise even though the first appellate order was common to multiple years. The composite-order exception could not defeat the monetary-limit benefit for individual years with low tax effect. For assessment year 2013-14, the real estate business was treated as set up upon acquisition of land for development, so the revenue expenditure incurred after that stage and the resulting business loss were allowable. The low-tax-effect appeals were dismissed and the remaining challenge failed on merits. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 11 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274078