Pre-enactment land-sale agreements escape stamp-duty value substitution where substantial banking-channel consideration was received before Section 43...
Customs valuation and classification require comparable evidence and assessment of imported goods in their actual condition, invalidating related pena...
Section 56(2)(ix) applies only when both statutory conditions coexist: a sum is received as an advance during negotiations for transfer of a capital asset, and the sum is subsequently forfeited because the transfer does not occur. Advances provided for locating, procuring and acquiring land for business projects were characterised as relating to stock-in-trade, rather than a capital asset, and therefore fell outside the provision. Mere lapse of time and absence of a refund claim did not establish forfeiture, particularly where the amounts remained recorded as liabilities and were confirmed by the payers. The addition was consequently deleted, and the Revenue's appeal was dismissed.
Section 56(2)(ix) applies only when both statutory conditions coexist: a sum is received as an advance during negotiations for transfer of a capital asset, and the sum is subsequently forfeited because the transfer does not occur. Advances provided for locating, procuring and acquiring land for business projects were characterised as relating to stock-in-trade, rather than a capital asset, and therefore fell outside the provision. Mere lapse of time and absence of a refund claim did not establish forfeiture, particularly where the amounts remained recorded as liabilities and were confirmed by the payers. The addition was consequently deleted, and the Revenue's appeal was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.