Income Tax : ITAT held that execution of a registered joint development agreement amounts to transfer of land. Capital gains timing must be det...
Income Tax : Learn about capital gains tax exemptions under Sections 54 to 54GB of the Income Tax Act, conditions for eligibility, and withdraw...
Income Tax : This report provides a consolidated overview of the critical monetary threshold limits stipulated under various sections of the In...
Income Tax : Sections 54 to 54GA allow capital gains exemptions if sale proceeds are reinvested in specific assets. These cover residential pro...
Income Tax : Overview of exemptions and allowances for salaried employees, taxpayers, and businesses under various Income Tax provisions for AY...
Income Tax : Representation against Extension of time limit under section 54 to 54GB without extension of Income Tax Return due date Vidarbha I...
CA, CS, CMA, Income Tax : We have not noticed any heed being extended towards various issues and possible solutions we have proposed through those represent...
Income Tax : KSCAA has requested to Hon’ble Minister of Finance to extend various time limits under section 54 to 54GB of the Income-tax Act,...
Income Tax : The Nagpur ITAT held that exemption under Section 54B requires evidence of active agricultural operations and not merely agricultu...
Income Tax : The ITAT Dehradun held that exemption under Section 54B cannot be denied merely for non-deposit in the Capital Gains Account Schem...
Income Tax : ITAT Indore held that exemption under Section 54B cannot be denied when investment in new agricultural land was made within the pr...
Income Tax : ITAT Indore held that Section 54 exemption cannot be denied merely for failure to deposit capital gains in the Capital Gain Deposi...
Income Tax : The ITAT Amritsar remanded a case involving denial of section 54B exemption where the assessee relied on Girdawari records to prov...
Income Tax : For claiming exemption Section 54 to 54 GB of the Act, for which last date falls between 01st April. 2021 to 28th February, 2022 m...
The Nagpur ITAT held that exemption under Section 54B requires evidence of active agricultural operations and not merely agricultural classification in revenue records. The assessee’s failure to produce supporting evidence led to denial of exemption.
The ITAT Dehradun held that exemption under Section 54B cannot be denied merely for non-deposit in the Capital Gains Account Scheme when the assessee actually invested the sale proceeds in agricultural land within the statutory period. The ruling treats such non-deposit as a procedural lapse.
ITAT Indore held that exemption under Section 54B cannot be denied when investment in new agricultural land was made within the prescribed two-year period. The Tribunal ruled that procedural non-compliance with the Capital Gain Deposit Scheme was not sufficient to reject the claim.
ITAT Indore held that Section 54 exemption cannot be denied merely for failure to deposit capital gains in the Capital Gain Deposit Scheme. The Tribunal ruled that actual investment in a new residential house within the prescribed two-year period satisfies the substantive requirement.
The ITAT Amritsar remanded a case involving denial of section 54B exemption where the assessee relied on Girdawari records to prove agricultural use of land. The Tribunal directed fresh verification of land records after finding disputes regarding cultivation entries in revenue documents.
The case addresses whether third-party cultivation affects Section 54B eligibility. The Tribunal ruled that use of land for agriculture, even via villagers, satisfies legal conditions. The decision reinforces substance over form in proving agricultural use.
The ITAT relied on surrounding circumstances, documentary evidence, and the principle of human probabilities to conclude that cash consideration was paid in a land transaction. The Tribunal confirmed the addition of unaccounted sale consideration as short-term capital gains.
ITAT Delhi held that exemption under section 54B of the Income Tax Act allowed since assessee is able to prove the nature of land as agricultural land based on revenue records and income tax return, wherein, income accepted as agricultural income.
The Tribunal deleted addition under Section 69C, holding that payments made by company on behalf of director were properly explained through ledger records and imprest arrangement.
ITAT Delhi held that Section 2(22)(e) cannot apply where the assessee held less than 10% shareholding in the lending company. As statutory thresholds were not met, the deemed dividend addition was largely deleted.
