Income Tax : A consolidated guide to Income-tax Act threshold limits for AY 2026-27 covering exemptions, deductions, TDS, TCS, compliance and p...
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 : The Income Tax Bill, 2025 renumbers Section 54F as Section 86 while retaining the existing conditions, computation, and exemption ...
Income Tax : Learn the exemptions available under Sections 54 to 54GB of the Income-tax Act, including eligible investments, timelines, exempti...
Income Tax : This guide explains the taxation of capital gains, computation methods, capital assets, and transfer provisions under the Income-t...
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 : All India Federation of Tax Practitioners (CZ) has requested CBDT that due date of filing return of income u/s 139(1) for all the ...
Income Tax : Direct Taxes Committee of ICAI has Request(s) for extension of various due dates under Income-tax Act, 1961 especially Tax Audit R...
Income Tax : Karnataka High Court held that reopening a completed scrutiny assessment without fresh tangible material is impermissible as it am...
Income Tax : ITAT held that exemption under Sections 54/54F cannot be denied where sale proceeds are invested in a residential house within the...
Income Tax : ITAT held ₹33 crore settled rights over the entire land, allowing full indexed acquisition cost and rejecting proportionate rest...
Income Tax : ITAT held that substantial construction and structural improvements satisfied Section 54F. AO was directed to allow the deduction....
Income Tax : The ITAT held that Section 54 exemption must be examined separately for each residential house sold. The benefit cannot be restric...
CA, CS, CMA : The ICAI Disciplinary Committee reprimanded CA Jayant Ishwardas Mehta for professional misconduct involving an incorrect income t...
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...
Income Tax : Vide Income Tax Notification No. 35/2020 dated 24.06.2020 govt extends Due date for ITR for FY 2018-19 upto 31.07.2020, Last...
The case involved denial of deduction due to delayed execution of purchase deed. The Tribunal held that investment in an under-construction property qualifies as construction within the extended time limit. It ruled that deduction cannot be denied on technical interpretation of timelines.
The issue involved taxing property value as unexplained investment without prior notice. The Court held that absence of a show cause notice under Section 69 violated principles of natural justice, leading to quashing of the order.
The Tribunal held that tenancy supported by rent receipts, bills, and agreements cannot be treated as a sham. It upheld exemption under Section 54F on surrender of tenancy rights.
The Tribunal clarified that possession is not a mandatory condition for claiming Section 54 exemption. It held that investment within the prescribed timeline satisfies the legal requirement.
The ITAT held that revision under Section 263 cannot be invoked where the Assessing Officer has conducted detailed inquiries and adopted a plausible view. The Tribunal ruled that a mere change of opinion by the PCIT does not render the assessment order erroneous or prejudicial.
ITAT Delhi held that gift of a property to wife specially when she is a co-sharer in the property cannot be considered to be a colourable device and camouflage transaction to taint claim of Section 54F of the Income Tax Act. Accordingly, deduction u/s. 54F erroneously disallowed.
The Tribunal ruled that Section 148A(b) requires a minimum of seven days for the assessee to respond. Failure to grant this statutory period renders the notice and subsequent reassessment proceedings illegal.
Section 54F Deduction Remanded as Tenants’ Affidavits Suggest Commercial Use of Properties, No Addition Without Corroborative Evidence: ITAT Deletes ₹50 Lakh On-Money Addition in Property Deal and Presumption Under Section 132(4A) Cannot Be Applied Against Assessee When Documents Seized from Third Party
ITAT Mumbai held that the cost of acquisition in present case would be the FMV of the flats which the assessee has acquired in exchange of surrender of tenancy right to the developer. Accordingly, AO is directed to re-compute cost of acquisition.
ITAT Pune held that failure to deposit the entire amount in the Capital Gains Account Scheme does not defeat Section 54F claim if full investment is made within the stipulated period. The ruling follows Karnataka High Court precedent. The addition of ₹91.45 lakh was deleted.
