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...
Explore the ITAT Mumbai decision in Rekha Singh vs ITO, directing the consideration of stamp duty value on the date of allotment for Section 56(2)(vii)(b) purposes. Detailed analysis and implications.
ITAT Delhi held that addition u/s. 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Income Tax Act on account of difference between circle rate and actual amount paid for purchase of land as the land in question was a capital asset.
ITAT Delhi’s decision regarding applicability of Section 56(2)(vii)(b) to companies before April 1, 2017 in case of Rhythm Polymers Pvt. Ltd. vs. PCIT.
ITAT Delhi rules on the taxability of bonus shares in the case of DCIT vs. Smt Aruna Chandhok. Detailed analysis of the decision and its implications.
Analysis of ITAT Delhis decision in DCIT Vs Aruna Chandhok case. Understand why no income tax is payable on bonus shares under Income from Other Sources.
ITAT Mumbai held that interest paid on housing loan borrowed for purchase of flat is not allowable as cost of acquisition.
Analysis of ITAT Chennai’s decision on taxing share premium: ACIT Vs Luncar Finance Pvt. Ltd. A focus on already taxed income in the hands of Investor Company
Unlock the complexities of development rights and their tax implications under India’s Income Tax Act, 1961. Delve into Section 56(2)(x) to understand the treatment of development rights as immovable property or capital asset. Explore legal definitions, case law, and the intricate interplay of tax provisions in this comprehensive guide.
ITAT Pune held that as per third proviso to section 56(2)(vii)(b), where the stamp value of the immovable property is disputed by the assessee on the ground mentioned in section 50C(2), the AO may refer the valuation of such property to the Valuation Officer. Accordingly, matter remanded.
ITAT Mumbai held that as conditions in second proviso to section 56(2)(vii)(b) satisfied, stamp duty as on the date of agreement would be compared with agreement value. Accordingly, since the stamp duty value is less than the agreement value, addition unsustainable.
