Invoice-based recovery claims remain time-barred despite separate winding-up proceedings, absent valid acknowledgment or part-payment of the disputed ...
Extended limitation fails without specific suppression allegations, while overseas employee secondment remains taxable as manpower supply within norma...
Time-share accommodation classification excludes Club or Association Service where purchasers receive contractual occupancy rights without genuine mem...
CENVAT credit for trading requires reversal, while taxable-service rental credit remains proportionately available and limitation issues await resolut...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
61 to 80 of 95833 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
ITAT held that the impugned shares were acquired by the assessee in a bona fide secondary market transaction in 2013 from a related concern and consistently reflected as investments in its balance sheet. The subsequent reduction of share capital pursuant to NCLT approval constituted a transfer taxable under the head "capital gains," and not "income from other sources." ITAT ruled that s.56(2)(viib) was inapplicable as there was no issue of shares at premium and that the AO wrongly applied the s.56 valuation methodology. For s.50CA, fair market value must be determined as on the actual date of transfer, which the assessee had substantiated. As the consideration was not below fair market value, s.50CA did not apply. The addition was deleted and the assessee's appeal allowed.
ITAT held that the impugned shares were acquired by the assessee in a bona fide secondary market transaction in 2013 from a related concern and consistently reflected as investments in its balance sheet. The subsequent reduction of share capital pursuant to NCLT approval constituted a transfer taxable under the head "capital gains," and not "income from other sources." ITAT ruled that s.56(2)(viib) was inapplicable as there was no issue of shares at premium and that the AO wrongly applied the s.56 valuation methodology. For s.50CA, fair market value must be determined as on the actual date of transfer, which the assessee had substantiated. As the consideration was not below fair market value, s.50CA did not apply. The addition was deleted and the assessee's appeal allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.