Purposive interpretation of residential house exemption: unregistered purchase agreement alone does not defeat relief, but investment must be verified...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
3041 to 3060 of 96333 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Reopening of assessment beyond four years failed because the recorded reasons did not show any omission by the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts, and relied only on material already on record; the reassessment notice and proceedings for A.Y. 2011-12 were therefore invalid. On merits, the addition under section 68 for share capital and share premium was deleted because the assessee produced evidence of investor identity, creditworthiness and transaction genuineness, including banking and corporate records. The Tribunal also noted that the pre-2013 position did not require proof of source of source, and that premium-related doubts, section 56(2)(viib), and the later amendment to section 68 did not justify the addition on the facts stated.
Reopening of assessment beyond four years failed because the recorded reasons did not show any omission by the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts, and relied only on material already on record; the reassessment notice and proceedings for A.Y. 2011-12 were therefore invalid. On merits, the addition under section 68 for share capital and share premium was deleted because the assessee produced evidence of investor identity, creditworthiness and transaction genuineness, including banking and corporate records. The Tribunal also noted that the pre-2013 position did not require proof of source of source, and that premium-related doubts, section 56(2)(viib), and the later amendment to section 68 did not justify the addition on the facts stated.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.