Income Tax : Explore the implications of the PCIT Vs I.A. Hydro Energy case regarding loan conversion to equity under Section 56(2)(viib) of th...
Income Tax : The issue involves a subscription amount of Rs. 1 Crores, with a dividend rate of 0.10% over a tenure of 20 years. This brief exam...
Income Tax : Unlock the complexities of development rights and their tax implications under India's Income Tax Act, 1961. Delve into Section 56...
Income Tax : Budget 2023 brings non-resident investors within the ambit of section 56(2)(viib) of the Act to eliminate tax avoidance possibilit...
Income Tax : Despite a significant gap between the agreement and registration dates, ITAT granted relief under the first and second provisos to...
Income Tax : The Bangalore ITAT accepted the assessee’s explanation that medical issues and expiry of the digital signature certificate cause...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai deleted the addition under Section 56(2)(vii)(b) after holding that a 2.3% variation between agreement value and stamp...
Income Tax : The issue was whether a notice granting less than the statutory minimum time is valid. The tribunal held that giving less than 7 d...
Income Tax : The case addresses whether reassessment is valid when approval is granted by the wrong authority. ITAT held that sanction under Se...
ITAT Delhi held that provisions of Section 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Income Tax Act Act which were introduced in the Act by Finance Act, 2010 cannot be given retrospective effect.
Budget 2023 brings non-resident investors within the ambit of section 56(2)(viib) of the Act to eliminate tax avoidance possibilities.
Bharat Keshavlal Shah Vs PCIT (ITAT Pune) Lastly comes the issue of section 56(2)(vii) made applicable in assessee’s case on account of alleged difference between stamp valuation and actual purchase consideration qua the sale deed executed in the relevant previous year. A perusal of the said sale deed dated 31.12.2013, and more particularly, the schedule […]
ITAT held that provisions of section 56(2)(viia) of are applicable only in cases where purchased share become property in the hands of buyer company and, if shares are of any other company.
ITAT Visakhapatnam held that civil suit is filed before the Hon’ble District Judge accordingly the matter is squarely covered as exception as per proviso to section 56(2)(vii)(b) of the act and accordingly we hold that there is no case for invoking the provisions of section 56(2)(vii)(b).
