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 : 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...
Income Tax : The Tribunal dismissed the challenge to reassessment proceedings as no arguments were presented by the assessee. The ruling highli...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held the assessment invalid as no mandatory notice under Section 143(2) was issued. The key takeaway is that absence ...
Income Tax : The case examined whether share premium could be taxed without proof of unaccounted funds. The Tribunal held that Section 56(2)(vi...
The Tribunal ruled that once an assessment under Section 153A is approved under Section 153D, it cannot be revised under Section 263. This reinforces limits on PCIT’s revisional powers.
Madras High Court upheld ITAT’s finding that receipt of bonus shares does not constitute income under Sections 2(22)(b) and 56(2)(viia). Revenue’s appeal was dismissed.
ITAT Kolkata held that gifts received from a brother-in-law are exempt under Section 56(2)(vii), as the relationship qualifies as relative for tax purposes.
ITAT Delhi ruled that the Assessing Officer cannot alter the share valuation method chosen by the assessee under Rule 56(2)(viib) of the Income Tax Rules. Consequently, the revenue’s appeal was dismissed.
The ITAT ruled that interest on enhanced compensation for the compulsory acquisition of agricultural land is fully exempt from income tax, citing Section 96 of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013. The Tribunal held that this special law overrides the general tax provisions (Sections 56 and 145A), deleting the entire Rs.97.44 lakh addition.
The ITAT Delhi sets aside over ₹1112 Cr in tax additions in Enormous Nivesh Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT, ruling that Section 56(2)(viia) applies only to the ‘transfer’ of shares, not the ‘fresh allotment’ (issue) of shares, which is governed by Section 56(2)(viib).
Chennai ITAT ruled in Devaraya Pillai Subramanian case that interest on enhanced compensation for compulsory acquisition of agricultural land, exempt under S.10(37), is also exempt.
ITAT held that provisions taxing difference in stamp value and purchase price apply only to land and buildings, not leasehold rights. Addition of ₹21.95 lakh was set aside.
Tribunal held that EDC paid to HUDA is a statutory levy and not interest, quashing disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) based on erroneous application of Section 194A.
ITAT Delhi held that disallowance of share premium under section 56(2)(viib) of the Income Tax Act not sustainable since shares are allotted to an existing shareholder and hence creditworthiness cannot be doubted. Accordingly, appeal of revenue dismissed.
