https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445544 ITAT Delhi dismissed the assessee's appeal regarding addition under section 56(2)(vii)(b) for difference between circle rate and actual purchase price of land. The assessee claimed land was purchased for business purposes and held as stock-in-trade, arguing co-owner brother's illness prevented development activities. ITAT found that despite three years passing since purchase in 2013-14, no concrete business actions were taken except signing an MOU. The tribunal concluded land remained a capital asset rather than stock-in-trade, upholding the addition. en-us Tue, 17 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 Nov 2023 11:11:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445544 ITAT Delhi dismissed the assessee's appeal regarding addition under section 56(2)(vii)(b) for difference between circle rate and actual purchase price of land. The assessee claimed land was purchased for business purposes and held as stock-in-trade, arguing co-owner brother's illness prevented development activities. ITAT found that despite three years passing since purchase in 2013-14, no concrete business actions were taken except signing an MOU. The tribunal concluded land remained a capital asset rather than stock-in-trade, upholding the addition. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 17 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445544