Income Tax : The Income-tax Act does not prescribe a single definition of "relative" for all purposes. Different provisions such as Sections 13...
Income Tax : The Finance (No. 2) Act, 2024 abolished angel tax from AY 2025-26 for all investors. This article explains why startups filing ret...
Income Tax : Learn when monetary, immovable, and movable property gifts become taxable under the Income-tax Act. The FAQs explain exemptions, t...
Income Tax : Income from Other Sources encompasses various taxable receipts such as dividends, gifts, family pension, lottery winnings, interes...
Income Tax : The document highlights that start-ups enjoying exemption must comply with prescribed restrictions on investments and asset acquis...
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 : ITAT Mumbai remanded the case to examine whether Section 56(2)(x) applied based on the agreement date and to consider refund of ex...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi held that circle rate-based land valuation is valid for determining FMV under Section 56(2)(viib) and deleted the addit...
Income Tax : ITAT held that interest earned from scheduled and co-operative banks was attributable to the society's business of providing credi...
Income Tax : The Tribunal ruled that a clerical mistake in the DRP's order could not justify sustaining a ₹10 lakh addition. It held that the...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi held that Section 56(2)(viib) could not be invoked where shares were allotted at a premium to a 100% holding company. T...
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...
The most essential condition of Sections 43CA ,50C & 56(2)(x) is that the Sale Consideration in whole or part should be received on or before date of registration of agreement only through ECS/RTGS/NEFT/EFT/IMPS/UPI/BHIM or other approved means of money transfer. In this case the Stamp Duty Value at the date of agreement will be allowed to be considered as Sale Consideration instead of Stamp Duty Value at the date of transfer of property under consideration.
In our view no addition under section 68 of the Act on account of share capital could have been made only if addition under section 56 of the Act on share premium was also made. This is because Assessing Officer had no reasons to belief that income has escaped assessment under section 68 of the Act being cash credit on account of share premium or share application money or share capital as the case may be.
A member of the ‘HUF’ has a pre-existing right in the family properties. A Coparcener has a pre-existing right and interest in the property and can demand partition also, however, the other members of the ‘HUF’ have right to be maintained out of the ‘HUF’ property. On division, the share in the estate/capital of the ‘HUF’ cannot be treated as income of the recipient, rather, the same will be a capital receipt in his hands.
It was held that transfer of shares of a company to a firm or a company, instead of an individual or an HUF, without consideration or at a price lower than the fair market value does not attract Section 56(2)(vii) of the Income Tax Act.
Genuine issue of Shares to Shareholders not to be considered under Anti-Abuse Provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961 In Income Tax Officer v. Shri Rajeev Ratanlal Tulshyan [I.T.A. No.5748/Mum/2017 A.Y. 2014-15 dated October 01, 2021] [along with cross objection filed by Shri Rajeev Ratanlal Tulshyan (the Respondent)], the Income Tax Officer (the Appellant) filed an […]
Taxability on Gifts, Rewards and Rewards Given to Sportsperson/Olympic Participants TAX ON GIFTS IN INDIA: In India, gift is exempted up to Rs. 50,000 and gifts from specific relatives such as parents, spouse and siblings are also exempted from tax. Other than specified before are taxable. Tax on gifts falls under the purview of Income […]
Joseph Mudaliar Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) Addition u/s 56(2)(vii)(b) on difference in value in respect of the subject properties where declared sale consideration shown by the assessee is lesser than the stamp duty value (market value) determined by the stamp duty authority Addition u/s 56(2)(vii)(b). The difference in value in respect of the subject properties […]
Naina Saraf Vs PCIT (ITAT Jaipur) Section 56(2)(vii)(b)(ii) cannot be applied prior to a A.Y. 2014-15 as section comes into effect from A.Y. 2015-16 The Finance Act, 2013 inserted clause (ii) in S. 56(2)(vii)(b) reading as under: ‘(ii) for a consideration which is less than the stamp duty value of the property by an amount […]
The CBDT has notified Income-tax (28th Amendment) Rules, 2021 to amend Rule 11UAC of the existing Income-Tax Rules, 1962. The notification shall come into force from 1st April, 2022 and shall be applicable from A.Y. 2022-23 onwards. Vide this notification, the CBDT has inserted the following new clause in Rule 11UAC: “(4) any movable property, […]
Shri Ashutosh Jha (HUF) Vs. ITO (ITAT Kolkata) The claim of the assessee has been that the assessee had purchased the property at a lower rate as per the value mentioned in the agreement to purchase dated 19-07-2012. However, the Ld. AO has adopted the stamp duty value as on date of sale i.e. 28-05-2013. […]
