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...
Vicarious liability for dishonoured company cheques may extend to non-signatory directors where complaints contain foundational responsibility avermen...
Charitable registration turns on predominant purpose and genuine activities, while incidental fees and related-party rent require supporting adverse m...
Page of 4794
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
121 to 140 of 95875 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 addition u/s 56(2)(viib) in respect of share premium received by the assessee-company is unsustainable. It found no allegation or evidence from the AO of any unaccounted money being introduced, and the genuineness of the share subscription, routed through banking channels and utilised for repayment of loans, stood established. ITAT ruled that the lower authorities could not disregard the assessee's DCF-based valuation and registered valuer's report by mechanically substituting guideline value for land and ignoring brand valuation. It emphasised that the statute requires determination of fair market value, not adoption of guideline rates, and disallowed the AO/CIT(A)'s change of valuation method. Consequently, the valuation adopted by the assessee was upheld and the assessee's appeal allowed in full.
ITAT held that the addition u/s 56(2)(viib) in respect of share premium received by the assessee-company is unsustainable. It found no allegation or evidence from the AO of any unaccounted money being introduced, and the genuineness of the share subscription, routed through banking channels and utilised for repayment of loans, stood established. ITAT ruled that the lower authorities could not disregard the assessee's DCF-based valuation and registered valuer's report by mechanically substituting guideline value for land and ignoring brand valuation. It emphasised that the statute requires determination of fair market value, not adoption of guideline rates, and disallowed the AO/CIT(A)'s change of valuation method. Consequently, the valuation adopted by the assessee was upheld and the assessee's appeal allowed in full.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4794
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
