Income Tax : The Income-tax Act, 2025 replaces the dividend-based taxation of buy-backs with capital gains taxation for ordinary shareholders, ...
Income Tax : Explore the latest exemptions, deductions and allowances available under the Income-tax Act for AY 2026-27. The guide covers salar...
Income Tax : ITAT held that Section 54 exemption must be examined separately for each residential house sold. Aggregating gains from multiple t...
Income Tax : The document provides a detailed summary of the special tax provisions applicable to different securities and classes of taxpayers...
Income Tax : Learn the exemptions available under Sections 54 to 54GB of the Income-tax Act, including eligible investments, timelines, exempti...
Income Tax : India and France have signed a protocol granting full taxing rights on capital gains from share sales to the country of company re...
Income Tax : Govt rationalizes long-term capital gains tax, reducing rates to 12.5% and simplifying holding periods. Relief provided for pre-Ju...
Income Tax : Finance Bill 2024 amends Section 55 to include fair market value for unlisted shares in IPOs. Changes apply retroactively from Apr...
Income Tax : The Finance Bill 2024 proposes a streamlined and rationalized taxation system for capital gains, with changes including reduced ho...
Income Tax : From April 1, 2025, Section 47 will exclude transfers of capital assets under gifts or wills from capital gains tax, with specific...
Income Tax : ITAT held ₹33 crore settled rights over the entire land, allowing full indexed acquisition cost and rejecting proportionate rest...
Income Tax : The ITAT held that Section 54 exemption must be examined separately for each residential house sold. The benefit cannot be restric...
Income Tax : ITAT held that Section 54F deduction cannot be denied where capital gains are invested in a residential house within the prescribe...
Income Tax : ITAT held that agricultural land within the prescribed municipal distance is a capital asset and restricted the on-money addition ...
Income Tax : The ITAT held that a penalty under Section 271AAB cannot survive where the show cause notice fails to specify the exact statutory ...
Income Tax : The government has authorised all non-rural branches of 19 banks to operate Capital Gains Account Scheme accounts, enhancing taxpa...
Income Tax : The amendment introduces electronic payment modes for capital gains deposits and clarifies the effective date of deposit. It enhan...
Income Tax : Ministry of Finance notifies IREDA bonds issued post-July 9, 2025, as long-term specified assets under Section 54EC for income tax...
Income Tax : Ministry of Finance announces amendment to Section 48 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, introducing a new cost inflation index effectiv...
Income Tax : The Ministry of Finance, through the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT), issued Notification No. 44/2024-Income-Tax on May 24, 2...
High Court held that consideration received on transfer of self-generated trademarks before 1 April 2002 was not taxable as capital gains because no ascertainable cost of acquisition existed, making computation provisions unworkable.
The issue was denial of capital gains exemption due to claim under wrong section. The tribunal held that a genuine claim cannot be rejected merely for citing an incorrect provision and remanded the case.
The issue was whether a share transfer without consideration constituted taxable capital gains. The Tribunal held that genuine family realignment is not taxable.
The issue involved taxation of capital gains based on a disputed land sale. The Tribunal held that once the sale deed was declared void, no capital gains could arise.
The issue was whether penalty under Section 270A is valid without specifying the exact charge. ITAT held that absence of a specific limb of misreporting makes the penalty invalid.
The Tribunal held that cash disclosed in earlier returns can explain seized cash. It restricted addition to the unexplained portion. Key takeaway: prior disclosures carry strong evidentiary value.
The Tribunal quashed penalty where the AO did not specify the exact limb of misreporting under Section 270A(9). It held that vague notices invalidate penalty proceedings. Key takeaway: specificity is mandatory for penalty levy.
The issue involved classification of land for capital gains taxation. The Court held that revenue records and evidence of agricultural activity prevail, making the land exempt from capital gains tax.
The Tribunal held reassessment invalid as the alleged escaped income did not exceed ₹50 lakh required for extended limitation. It ruled that invoking extended time under Section 149 without satisfying this condition is illegal.
The Tribunal held that total investment in the new property must be considered for exemption, not just payments within one year. It allowed full capital gains exemption as conditions were substantially met.
