Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
The ITAT remanded the matter to the Jurisdictional AO for further verification regarding possession and consideration under the development agreement. The Tribunal held that for a capital gains event under sections 2(47) and 45, both transfer of possession and receipt of consideration must be established. Since the assessee and co-owners still physically possess the property and no construction or consideration transfer has been demonstrated, the Tribunal found the addition for long-term capital gains premature. The AO was directed to conduct an inspection or obtain a remand report to ascertain possession status and payment of consideration. If possession remains with the assessee and no consideration was passed, no capital gains addition shall be made. Conversely, if facts prove otherwise, the AO shall decide per law after affording the assessee a fair hearing. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.
The ITAT remanded the matter to the Jurisdictional AO for further verification regarding possession and consideration under the development agreement. The Tribunal held that for a capital gains event under sections 2(47) and 45, both transfer of possession and receipt of consideration must be established. Since the assessee and co-owners still physically possess the property and no construction or consideration transfer has been demonstrated, the Tribunal found the addition for long-term capital gains premature. The AO was directed to conduct an inspection or obtain a remand report to ascertain possession status and payment of consideration. If possession remains with the assessee and no consideration was passed, no capital gains addition shall be made. Conversely, if facts prove otherwise, the AO shall decide per law after affording the assessee a fair hearing. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.