Section 54
Querist : Anonymous
You may refer to the same for your case. However, kindly note -
1. its a tribunal ruling. Thus it is not binding on any other jurisdictional court.
2. Before Prema Shah judgment the earlier courts disallowed exemption in similar cases (refer Smt. Leena J. Shah v. ACIT, 6 SOT 721 (Ahd.). (however this judgment was itself was not too strong)
My personal belief is that allowing for exemption in such cases would lead to absurd result defeating the whole intent of promoting investment in residential assets in the country. So don't be surprised if they amend the act to nullify such judgments.
3. You also need to check how this fits in DTAA. Often it happens in case of Capital gains that both the countries are allowed to tax as per domestic rules. In such a scenario you still end up paying taxes in the country of residence.
Querist : Anonymous
Querist : Anonymous
Click here to login now
Similar Resolved Queries
- Unregistered suppliers utility
- TDS CREDIT MISMATCHING
- Buy back of shares u/s69
- Tax Audit Applicability – Newly Formed Partnership Firm with Profit Below 6%/8%
- Difference between Date of Payment and Date of Deduction?
- Bank details not Visible on Traces Portal
- Taxability of Partnership firm for FY 2025-26
- Journal entry of busniess expenses
- LIC maturity claim whether taxable
- ADDITION OF CHALLAN IN TDS RETURN FORM 140
- CALCULATION OF DEFFERED TAX - OP BL IS DTL & CURRET IT DTA
- LLP audit under companies act
- Experienced CA recommendation from Kolkata for FNO return filing
- Interest Reporting in Form 168
- Sales of goods of amount Rs77 lakhs to a party
- Tax Demand of ₹4,650 for AY 2026-27
- Concept of Vendor and customner reconciliation
- Mistake in e-invoice identified after 24 hours
- EXPORT PAYMENT
- NRI ITR2 account in 2025-26.
Trending Online Classes
-
DT & Audit (Exam Oriented Fastrack Batch) - For May 26 Exams and onwards Full English
CA Bhanwar Borana & CA Shubham Keswani
CAclubindia
