https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356882 The High Court of Bombay granted an interim stay in favor of the Petitioner, finding that the Assessing Officer lacked valid reason to believe that taxable income had escaped assessment for the Assessment Year 2010-11. The court held that the artificial income concept under Section 56(2)(viia) of the Income Tax Act did not apply retrospectively to the transaction in question, supporting the Petitioner's claim of no income due to a shortfall in consideration paid. The judgment underscored the need to address taxpayer objections seriously and ensure assessments are not mere formalities. en-us Thu, 08 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 13 Mar 2018 22:35:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356882 The High Court of Bombay granted an interim stay in favor of the Petitioner, finding that the Assessing Officer lacked valid reason to believe that taxable income had escaped assessment for the Assessment Year 2010-11. The court held that the artificial income concept under Section 56(2)(viia) of the Income Tax Act did not apply retrospectively to the transaction in question, supporting the Petitioner's claim of no income due to a shortfall in consideration paid. The judgment underscored the need to address taxpayer objections seriously and ensure assessments are not mere formalities. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 08 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356882