<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2018 (10) TMI 1391 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=369425</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the Assessing Officer&#039;s addition of Rs. 31,50,000 under section 56(2)(vii), confirming the Fair Market Value calculation of Rs. 31.05 per share as of 22.06.2010. It agreed with the CIT(A) that the appellant should have prepared a balance sheet as of the valuation date and rejected the appellant&#039;s plea for retrospective application of the amended Rule 11U(b). Consequently, the appeal was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 09 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 27 Oct 2018 07:59:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=539764" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (10) TMI 1391 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=369425</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the Assessing Officer&#039;s addition of Rs. 31,50,000 under section 56(2)(vii), confirming the Fair Market Value calculation of Rs. 31.05 per share as of 22.06.2010. It agreed with the CIT(A) that the appellant should have prepared a balance sheet as of the valuation date and rejected the appellant&#039;s plea for retrospective application of the amended Rule 11U(b). Consequently, the appeal was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=369425</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>