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...
For applying s.56(2)(vii)(b), the proviso requires an agreement fixing consideration, identification of stamp duty value as on the agreement date, and part payment by a non-cash mode on or before that date. The allotment letter, containing agreed terms, identified the specific flat, fixed the consideration and payment schedule, and conferred exclusivity; it was enforceable as a valid contract under s.10 of the Contract Act, supported by part payment through banking channels. Accordingly, the stamp duty value as on the allotment date governed, and no taxable difference arose; the addition was deleted and the taxpayer's grounds were allowed. - ITAT
For applying s.56(2)(vii)(b), the proviso requires an agreement fixing consideration, identification of stamp duty value as on the agreement date, and part payment by a non-cash mode on or before that date. The allotment letter, containing agreed terms, identified the specific flat, fixed the consideration and payment schedule, and conferred exclusivity; it was enforceable as a valid contract under s.10 of the Contract Act, supported by part payment through banking channels. Accordingly, the stamp duty value as on the allotment date governed, and no taxable difference arose; the addition was deleted and the taxpayer's grounds were allowed. - ITAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.