"CA Vijayakumar Shetty qualified in 1994 and in practice since then. Founding partner of Shetty & Co. He is a graduate from St Aloysius College, Mangalore ."
The Supreme Court refused relief to borrowers who defaulted from the very first instalment after availing an ₹8.09 crore loan. The Court held that an offer to repay only the principal amount after six years was too little too late.
The Supreme Court upheld a Will executed in favour of the testator’s sister despite objections from his wife and children. The Court ruled that exclusion of natural heirs alone is not a suspicious circumstance when the Will is properly proved.
The Tribunal held that interest income earned from mandatory reserve fund deposits and co-operative bank accounts qualifies for deduction under Section 80P. It observed that temporarily parking surplus funds does not amount to carrying on a separate investment activity.
The Supreme Court held that interest paid on borrowed funds was deductible under Section 36(1)(iii) because the loan was used for business purposes. The Court ruled that commercial expediency and composite business operations justified the deduction claim.
The Tribunal ruled that the use of the word may in Section 271AAC gives discretionary power to the Assessing Officer and does not mandate automatic penalty levy. It emphasized that such discretion must be exercised judiciously.
The ITAT held that the institution’s activities as a seminary imparting religious training to priests established its religious character. It remanded the matter for fresh consideration of registration as a religious trust under Section 12AB.
The ITAT held that teaching Arabic language and Islamic studies through systematic instruction amounts to education and not religious activity. It directed grant of registration under Section 12AB and approval under Section 80G.
The ITAT ruled that the Assessing Officer wrongly adopted the stamp duty valuation despite contrary valuation material on record. The Tribunal directed fresh capital gain computation using the lower departmental valuation.
The ITAT held that stamp duty valuation could not be blindly adopted where the property was affected by BBMP demolition proceedings for unauthorized construction. The Tribunal accepted the actual purchase price as fair market value and deleted the addition.
The Tribunal ruled that a flat 15% profit estimation was excessive where all contract receipts were received through banking channels with TDS deductions. It directed recomputation of income at 7% of turnover.
