ITAT confirmed that ownership of additional properties under construction does not block Section 54F deduction if they are business assets. Deduction on LTCG invested in residential property was upheld.
The Tribunal set aside the prior order as the deceased assessee could not represent himself and legal heirs were not on record. CIT(A) is directed to consider all issues afresh, including denial of indexed cost and 54F exemption.
The ITAT held that the AO’s allowance of an 80G deduction without examining the background of M/s. Aadhar Foundation was erroneous. The decision reinforces that Explanation-2 to Section 263 requires verification when there is material indicating possible bogus donations.
The Tribunal upheld CIT(A)’s deletion of Rs. 10,00,059/- as the addition was based solely on uncorroborated third-party information. No primary evidence linked the assessee to the alleged accommodation entries.
Tribunal rules that procedural delay in filing Form 10B does not bar exemption under sections 11 and 12, following Supreme Court guidance on procedural lapses.
The Tribunal deleted Rs. 1.03 crore added under Section 69A, holding that funds remitted from the USA originated from disclosed long-term capital gains. Detailed bank records and SWIFT copies substantiated the source beyond doubt.
The Tribunal held that the enhanced ₹25-lakh limit under section 10(10AA) must be applied based on earlier co-ordinate bench rulings. The key takeaway is that restriction to ₹3 lakh was deleted.
The issue was whether failure to deposit unutilised capital gains in CGAS before the due date defeats Section 54B relief. The ITAT held that where eligible agricultural land is purchased within time and cheques are issued with sufficient balance, CGAS non-deposit is only procedural. Full exemption was therefore allowed.
The key question was whether STR-based information can trigger harsh taxation under Section 115BBE. The ITAT held that without concrete evidence of non-genuine transactions, such additions cannot stand. Both reopening and tax addition were annulled.
The issue was denial of charitable exemption due to alleged non-filing of Form 10B. The ITAT held that the audit report was filed on time and wrongly ignored by CPC. Substantive exemption under Section 11 was therefore restored.
