“Section 10(47)”
The decision most relied on for Section 10(47) is Sunil Siddharthbhai v. CIT (156 ITR 509), cited in 82 judgments on BharatTax.
Leading authorities on Section 10(47)
A partner's contribution of a personal asset to a partnership firm does not amount to a "transfer" for capital gains purposes under the Income-tax Act, as the consideration (the partner's interest in the firm) is indeterminate, and the computational machinery for capital gains fails.
Income from letting out immovable property, even with ancillary services, is taxable as 'Income from House Property' if the dominant intention is to exploit the property itself, not to run a complex business providing integrated services. The classification depends on the assessee's primary object in exploiting the property.
There can be no presumption that an assessee must have incurred expenditure to earn tax-free income. Disallowance under section 14A requires actual expenditure, not notional or estimated amounts.
Profits and gains from scraps resulting from a manufacturing process are eligible for deduction under Section 80IC of the Income Tax Act.
Amendments to section 80IB(10) of the Income-tax Act, particularly clause (f), have prospective effect and do not apply retrospectively to projects approved before the amendment date.
An order passed by the Assessing Officer is considered erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue if it allows a deduction or claim without proper application of mind or necessary inquiries.
An assessee is not eligible for deduction under section 80-IB(10) if it acts merely as a contractor and not a developer. This is the case where the assessee sells plots to customers, registers sale deeds, and subsequently constructs buildings at an agreed price, indicating it did not fulfill the developer role.
