https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292085 The appeal filed by the revenue was dismissed. The CIT(A) correctly appreciated the business activities of the assessee, noting that taxing the same income twice would result in impermissible double taxation. The construction expenditure was rightly considered as Capital Work in Progress, funded by shareholders. The assessee could not escape tax liability by using different nomenclature, and changes in the Articles of Association were deemed valid. The deletion of income from the sale of a building was directed to avoid double taxation. The decision upheld on 23rd August 2018 ensured fair treatment and avoidance of double taxation. en-us Thu, 23 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 05 Dec 2020 18:45:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292085 The appeal filed by the revenue was dismissed. The CIT(A) correctly appreciated the business activities of the assessee, noting that taxing the same income twice would result in impermissible double taxation. The construction expenditure was rightly considered as Capital Work in Progress, funded by shareholders. The assessee could not escape tax liability by using different nomenclature, and changes in the Articles of Association were deemed valid. The deletion of income from the sale of a building was directed to avoid double taxation. The decision upheld on 23rd August 2018 ensured fair treatment and avoidance of double taxation. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 23 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292085