Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Snchalata Heramb Dhayagude Vs Jurisdictional AO (ITAT Mumbai)
Related Assessment Year : 2018-19
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Snchalata Heramb Dhayagude Vs Jurisdictional AO (ITAT Mumbai) Section 56(2)(x) Cannot Apply Because No Immovable Property Was Actually Received During the Year; No Tax Under Section 56(2)(x) Because Right to Future Flat Is Not Equal to Receipt of Property; Redevelopment Flat Not Taxable Under Section 56(2)(x) Because Possession Was Not Handed Over; Stamp Duty Value Addition Fails Because Receipt of Alternate Accommodation Had Not Occurred; Section 56(2)(x) Addition Deleted Because Possession Is Essential to Constitute Receipt of Immovable Property; Tax on Redevelopment Accommodation Held Prema...
This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.

Author Bio

CA Vijayakumar Shetty qualified in 1994 and in practice since then. Founding partner of Shetty & Co. He is a graduate from St Aloysius College, Mangalore . View Full Profile

My Published Posts

Reopening Fails When AO Taxes a Different Income Than the One Recorded in Reasons ITAT Quashes Reassessment: Only Profit Element Matters, Not Entire Commodity Transaction Value ITAT Upholds Denial of Section 80GGC Deduction for Donations to Alleged Accommodation Entry Political Party SBI Wins LTC TDS Dispute: No Assessee-in-Default When Bank Followed High Court Orders ITAT: Profit Cannot Be Estimated Arbitrarily Merely Because Books Were Not Produced View More Published Posts

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Search Post by Date
June 2026
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930