Customs valuation must use comparable contemporary imports, while confiscation fines and penalties require proportionate recalculation on reassessed v...
Depositor-protection proceedings prevail over corporate insolvency, while liquidators may recover chit receivables using copies of seized company reco...
Intermediary service classification fails where overseas admission facilitation is supplied independently, preserving export treatment and small-provi...
Satellite transponder bandwidth is telecommunication, not Business Support Service; foreign non-telegraph providers triggered no service tax liability...
Commitment proceedings gain extended timelines, structured defect refiling, and automatic resumption of inquiry after the adjusted completion period e...
Centralised assessment transfer becomes unwarranted once the searched person's assessment is complete, requiring restoration to the appropriate charge...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
321 to 340 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" ?
Receipt of a new residential flat in exchange for surrender of an old flat under a redevelopment arrangement was held not to be receipt of immovable property for inadequate consideration within section 56(2)(x). The Tribunal, relying on its earlier decision in Anil Dattaram Pitale v. ITO, found that the transaction was an exchange linked to redevelopment rather than a taxable transfer attracting deemed income. The addition made under section 56(2)(x) was therefore deleted in full, and the appeal was allowed on merits.
Receipt of a new residential flat in exchange for surrender of an old flat under a redevelopment arrangement was held not to be receipt of immovable property for inadequate consideration within section 56(2)(x). The Tribunal, relying on its earlier decision in Anil Dattaram Pitale v. ITO, found that the transaction was an exchange linked to redevelopment rather than a taxable transfer attracting deemed income. The addition made under section 56(2)(x) was therefore deleted in full, and the appeal was allowed on merits.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.