Income Tax : The removal of the provision means companies and investors are no longer taxed on share premiums exceeding fair market value, crea...
Income Tax : This explains how fair market value governs taxation under multiple provisions including gifts, ESOPs, and slump sales. It highlig...
Income Tax : Courts hold that one-time alimony is a capital receipt arising from extinguishment of rights and not taxable. The ruling clarifies...
Income Tax : The article explains how violating the twin conditions under Section 50C(2) can block valuation relief and trigger taxation on hig...
Income Tax : Overview of income taxed under other sources, including dividends, winnings, interest, deemed income, forfeited advances, family p...
Income Tax : Finance Bill 2024 proposes the sunset of Section 56(2)(viib) from April 2025, eliminating the tax on shares issued above face valu...
Income Tax : Amendment to section 56(2)(viib) of Act extending the applicability of section to issue of shares to non-residents has been made a...
Income Tax : CBDT proposes changes to Rule 11UA in respect of ANGEL TAX- Also proposes to notify Excluded Entities In the Finance Act, 2023, ...
Income Tax : IMB Certificate of Eligible Business is not a pre-requisite to avail the benefits of non-application of the provisions of clause (...
Income Tax : Representation for widening the scope of benefit in case of difference in agreement price and Circle Rate of property is upto 20 p...
Income Tax : Tribunal ruled that objections relating to defective title, encroachments, and legal disputes require proper valuation examination...
Income Tax : Tribunal ruled that future projections under DCF method cannot be tested solely against later actual financial performance. It obs...
Income Tax : The Supreme Court held that grants disbursed by a statutory corporation formed part of its core business functions and qualified a...
Income Tax : Madras High Court held that time-share membership fees could not be fully taxed in the year of receipt since the assessee had cont...
Income Tax : Mumbai ITAT held that Section 56(2)(x) applies to purchase of MHADA leasehold property rights despite reliance on Section 50C ruli...
Income Tax : Notification regarding Income-tax Act Section 56(2)(viib) and assessment of Startup Companies. Clarifications for assessing recogn...
Income Tax : CBDT) amends Income Tax Rule 11UA regarding valuation of unquoted equity shares for tax purposes. Learn about changes in this amen...
Income Tax : Details of Sixteenth Amendment to Income Tax Rules (2023) on computation of income chargeable under life insurance policies as per...
Income Tax : In the Finance Act, 2023, an amendment was introduced in this provision to bring the consideration received from non-residents wit...
Income Tax : CBDT issued Notification No. 29/2023- Income-Tax specifying certain classes of persons for the purpose of sub-clause (ii) of th...
Tribunal holds that Section 28 interest forms part of compensation for compulsory acquisition and cannot be taxed as income from other sources. Confirms exemption under Section 10(37).
Tribunal confirms that co-operative societies’ operational expenditures have business nexus with interest income; Section 57 deduction of Rs.62.57 lakh allowed.
The Tribunal allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, restoring the matter to the AO for verification of corporate credit card payments. The decision emphasizes that taxpayers must be provided a final opportunity to substantiate deposits and income before any additions are finalized. This safeguards procedural fairness in tax proceedings.
ITAT Mumbai confirmed all expense disallowances and additions for unexplained share capital, premium, and warrants. The assessee failed to prove genuineness or creditworthiness, and identity alone was insufficient under section 68.
The addition arose from adopting registration-date valuation under Section 56(2)(vii)(b), while the assessee produced documents showing prior rights and payments. The Tribunal held the new evidence to be material and directed the CIT(A) to reconsider the issue afresh.
This case examines whether the PCIT could revise an assessment under section 263 when the AO allowed interest income deduction under section 80P. The ITAT ruled that the AO’s order was a plausible view, and both conditions for invoking section 263 were not met.
Additions for alleged on-money payments were disallowed because the evidence relied on by authorities contained errors and lacked authenticity. The decision highlights the need for corroborated, primary evidence in tax proceedings.
The ITAT remitted the issue to the CIT(A), noting that exemption provisions were wrongly applied to a non-qualifying investor. The takeaway is that exemption claims in share premium cases must match statutory definitions and evidence.
The Tribunal held that purchase from a State Government entity cannot be undervalued, deleting Rs. 6.59 crore addition under Section 56(2)(x).
The case examined whether the tax officer was justified in rejecting the assessee’s DCF-based share valuation under Section 56(2)(viib). The Tribunal held that once DCF is chosen, the AO cannot switch to NAV merely because subsequent financials differ from projections
