Mis-declaration and Concealment: confiscation affirmed, transaction value re-determined and mandatory penalty sustained; redemption allowed on payment...
Page of 4821
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
5761 to 5780 of 96408 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Primary issue was whether assets received under a scheme of demerger attracted deemed income u/s 56(2)(x) because the demerger allegedly violated Section 2(19AA) and the swap ratio/valuation contravened Rule 11UA. Tribunal held Section 2(19AA)(iv) mandates proportionate share allotment only, Rule 11UA cannot be read into Section 2(19AA), the registered valuer's computation was reasonable and the scheme complied with Section 2(19AA) read with Section 47(vi); consequence: addition u/s 56(2)(x) deleted. Separately, payment under an unregistered MOU was not a "specified agreement" attracting TDS u/s 194IC; consequence: no TDS liability. - ITAT
Primary issue was whether assets received under a scheme of demerger attracted deemed income u/s 56(2)(x) because the demerger allegedly violated Section 2(19AA) and the swap ratio/valuation contravened Rule 11UA. Tribunal held Section 2(19AA)(iv) mandates proportionate share allotment only, Rule 11UA cannot be read into Section 2(19AA), the registered valuer's computation was reasonable and the scheme complied with Section 2(19AA) read with Section 47(vi); consequence: addition u/s 56(2)(x) deleted. Separately, payment under an unregistered MOU was not a "specified agreement" attracting TDS u/s 194IC; consequence: no TDS liability. - ITAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4821 
Join Channel 
