Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
The ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal, holding that the assumption of jurisdiction u/s 153C of the Income Tax Act by the Assessing Officer was vitiated due to a lack of proper 'satisfaction note'. The 'satisfaction note' lacked tangible and descriptive information, indicating a lack of application of mind. Consequently, the notice issued u/s 153C and the consequent assessment order were quashed. Additionally, regarding the valuation of a property, the ITAT accepted the assessee's contention and the District Valuation Officer's report, which was closer to the declared sale consideration. The significant difference between the sale consideration mentioned in the Agreement to Sale and the Sale Deed was deemed unconceivable and contrary to the estimated market value. The assessee's declared sale consideration was upheld in the absence of any contrary inquiry by the Revenue.
The ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal, holding that the assumption of jurisdiction u/s 153C of the Income Tax Act by the Assessing Officer was vitiated due to a lack of proper 'satisfaction note'. The 'satisfaction note' lacked tangible and descriptive information, indicating a lack of application of mind. Consequently, the notice issued u/s 153C and the consequent assessment order were quashed. Additionally, regarding the valuation of a property, the ITAT accepted the assessee's contention and the District Valuation Officer's report, which was closer to the declared sale consideration. The significant difference between the sale consideration mentioned in the Agreement to Sale and the Sale Deed was deemed unconceivable and contrary to the estimated market value. The assessee's declared sale consideration was upheld in the absence of any contrary inquiry by the Revenue.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.