See the footer if you would like to unsubscribe from the newsletter
Dear Subscriber,
Dear Subscriber,
Navin Jolly vs. ITO (Karnataka High Court)
S. 54F: In determining whether the assessee owns more than one residential property, the usage of the property has to be considered. If an apartment is sanctioned for residential purposes but is in fact being used for commercial purposes as a serviced apartment, it has to be treated as commercial property. Alternatively, several independent residential units in the same building have to be treated as one residential unit and there is no impediment to allowance of exemption u/s 54F(1) The usage of the property has to be considered for determining whether the property in question is a residential property or a commercial property. It is not in dispute that the aforesaid two apartments are being put to commercial use and therefore, the aforesaid apartments cannot be treated as residential apartments. The contention of the revenue that the apartments cannot be taxed on the basis of the usage does not deserve acceptance in view of decisions of Kerala, Delhi, Allahabad, Calcutta and Hyderabad High Courts with which we respectfully concur. 11. Alternatively, we hold that assessee even otherwise is entitled to the benefit of exemption under Section 54F(1) of the Act as the assessee owns two apartments of 500 square feet in same building and 17 therefore, it has to be treated as one residential unit. The aforesaid fact cannot be permitted to act as impediment to allowance of exemption under Section 54F(1) of the Act
Muradul Haque vs. ITO (ITAT Delhi)
S. 40(a)(ia): The amendment to s. 40(a)(ia) by the Finance (No.2) Act, 2015 w.e.f. 01.04.2015, which restricts the disallowance for failure to deduct TDS to 30% of the expenditure instead of 100%, is curative in nature and should be applied retrospectively We find that the Finance (No.2) Act has made amendment to section 40(a)(ia) of the Act w.e.f. 01.04.2015. Various benches of the Tribunals including the Delhi Benches of the Tribunal, have held the amendment made by Finance (No 2) Act to be curative in nature. We further find the coordinate bench of the Tribunal in the case of R.H. International Vs. ITO (supra) has held that disallowance u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act be restricted to 30% of the expenses paid as against 100% because amended provision is curative in nature and the provisions should be applied retrospectively
Black Money Law – Prospective And Not Retrospective Or Retroactive, An Arduous Plea
Advocate Gaurav Jain has raised convincing arguments on the controversial question whether undisclosed income or undisclosed assets earned/acquired prior to the assessment year 2016-17 are covered by The Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015. He has explained why, on a plain interpretation of the statutory provisions, the Act cannot be regarded as being retrospective or retroactive in operation.. He has argued that if a contrary view is taken, the Act would fall foul of Article 20(1) of the Constitution See Also: Digest of case laws (updated regularly) containing latest judgements reported in BCAJ, CTR, DTR, ITD, ITR, ITR (Trib), Chamber's Journal, SOT, Taxman, TTJ, BCAJ, ACAJ, www.itatonline.org and other journals
Application Of Natural Justice And Other Issues In Reassessment (Video)
Advocate Kapil Goel has dealt with the various legal and procedural aspects of reopening of assessments under sections 147 and 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. He has referred to all the important judgements on the principles of natural justice and explained how its non-observance by the AO can prove fatal to the reassessment. He has also prepared a check-list of the manner in which taxpayers should respond to a reopening notice. Practical suggestions regarding the correspondence with the Department have also been offered__._,_.___
Posted by: "editor@itatonline.org" <itatonline.org@gmail.com>
| Reply via web post | • | Reply to sender | • | Reply to group | • | Start a New Topic | • | Messages in this topic (1) |
.
__,_._,___
0 comments:
Post a Comment