Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Customs Cargo Service Provider appointment extends custodianship to additional terminal land, subject to cargo-control, security and licence condition...
The ITAT Delhi considered an appeal regarding the addition u/s 56(2)(viib) read with rule 11UA due to a difference in the valuation of shares, analyzing the impact of CBDT notification 81/2023 dated 25.08.2023. The notification states that if the difference between the issue price and the value adopted by the AO is 10% or less, the issue price will be deemed the fair value of shares. In this case, with a 2.21% difference, falling below the 10% threshold, the addition was deemed unsustainable. The amendment to Rule 11UA was seen as curative, aiming to address unintended consequences and make the provision workable. The retrospective application of the amendment was supported by judicial pronouncements to ensure a reasonable interpretation of the section. Consequently, the addition u/s 56(2)(viib) read with rule 11UA was found unsustainable, and the appeal of the assessee was allowed.
The ITAT Delhi considered an appeal regarding the addition u/s 56(2)(viib) read with rule 11UA due to a difference in the valuation of shares, analyzing the impact of CBDT notification 81/2023 dated 25.08.2023. The notification states that if the difference between the issue price and the value adopted by the AO is 10% or less, the issue price will be deemed the fair value of shares. In this case, with a 2.21% difference, falling below the 10% threshold, the addition was deemed unsustainable. The amendment to Rule 11UA was seen as curative, aiming to address unintended consequences and make the provision workable. The retrospective application of the amendment was supported by judicial pronouncements to ensure a reasonable interpretation of the section. Consequently, the addition u/s 56(2)(viib) read with rule 11UA was found unsustainable, and the appeal of the assessee was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4784
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
