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...
ITAT ruled that for AY 2015-16 and 2016-17, the Assessing Officer (AO) incorrectly applied Rule 11UA in determining fair market value (FMV) of shares. The tribunal found that the rule requiring FMV of underlying assets was only applicable from AY 2018-19. The AO should have valued shares using book value as per the balance sheet for the relevant assessment years. The CIT(A)'s order deleting additions under section 56(2)(vii)(c) was upheld, and the revenue's appeal was dismissed, finding no procedural or substantive irregularities in the assessee's share acquisition and valuation.
ITAT ruled that for AY 2015-16 and 2016-17, the Assessing Officer (AO) incorrectly applied Rule 11UA in determining fair market value (FMV) of shares. The tribunal found that the rule requiring FMV of underlying assets was only applicable from AY 2018-19. The AO should have valued shares using book value as per the balance sheet for the relevant assessment years. The CIT(A)'s order deleting additions under section 56(2)(vii)(c) was upheld, and the revenue's appeal was dismissed, finding no procedural or substantive irregularities in the assessee's share acquisition and valuation.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.