Permanent Establishment and Business Connection: foreign consultancy receipts not attributable where no fixed base or corporate veil piercing establis...
Limitation period commencement and procedural inquiry rules: identity-based limitation upheld; complaints by authorised public servants need not attra...
ITAT held that Section 56(2)(x) cannot be applied retrospectively to a property transfer concluded by agreement in 2010; the tribunal accepted uncontested facts that substantial payments and possession occurred after the 2010 agreement and that subsequent registration in 2018 did not convert the pre-existing transaction into one chargeable under that provision. CIT(A)'s technical dismissal on advance-tax and belated return grounds did not address the substantive legal point. Applying the principle that a provision does not apply to agreements concluded prior to its enactment, the addition under Section 56(2)(x) was deleted and the appeal allowed for AY 2018-19.
ITAT held that Section 56(2)(x) cannot be applied retrospectively to a property transfer concluded by agreement in 2010; the tribunal accepted uncontested facts that substantial payments and possession occurred after the 2010 agreement and that subsequent registration in 2018 did not convert the pre-existing transaction into one chargeable under that provision. CIT(A)'s technical dismissal on advance-tax and belated return grounds did not address the substantive legal point. Applying the principle that a provision does not apply to agreements concluded prior to its enactment, the addition under Section 56(2)(x) was deleted and the appeal allowed for AY 2018-19.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
