The Tribunal held that the amendment to Section 55A applies prospectively and could not be used for land transactions completed before 01.07.2012. As the assessee had relied on a registered valuers higher valuation, the DVO reference was declared invalid and the appeal was allowed.
The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer could not validly refer the matter to the DVO for a transaction completed before the 2012 amendment to Section 55A. Capital gains were directed to be recomputed using the registered valuers report.
The Tribunal held that for Assessment Year 2010-11, a reference to the DVO was impermissible where the assessee’s declared value exceeded the department’s estimate. The resulting capital gains addition was therefore deleted.
The Surat ITAT held that for assessment years prior to AY 2013-14, the DVO had no authority under Section 55A to reduce the fair market value adopted by an assessee based on a registered valuer’s report. The resulting LTCG addition was therefore deleted.
The ITAT held that exemption under Sections 11 and 12 could not be denied solely due to delayed filing of Form 10B. The matter was remanded for verification and grant of eligible exemption.
The Tribunal upheld tax addition where agricultural land was acquired below stamp duty valuation and DVO-determined fair market value. It ruled that agricultural status of land does not exclude applicability of section 56(2)(x).
The ITAT Surat held that abnormal price rise in a penny stock and surrounding circumstances justified treating claimed LTCG as unexplained income under Section 68. The Tribunal found the transactions to be part of a pre-arranged accommodation entry scheme.
The ITAT Surat held that bank transactions reflected cheque discounting business activity and could not be fully treated as unexplained cash credits under Section 68. Only estimated commission income and profit were sustained.
ITAT ruled that deduction under Section 80JJAA could not be claimed where the business was acquired through amalgamation. The Tribunal held that transfer of assets, liabilities, and business operations constituted business reorganisation under the Act.
The ITAT Surat remanded a case involving a Rs.30 lakh gift treated as unexplained cash credit under Section 68. The Tribunal allowed the assessee another opportunity to submit bank records and explain the source of the gift.
