https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754611 ITAT Chennai set aside CIT(A) orders regarding additions under section 56(2)(ix) for forfeiture of advance received during property transfer negotiations. The tribunal found contradictory facts where the assessee claimed negotiations were ongoing while the alleged buyer denied entering any MoU or paying advance. Since the department made additions in both parties' hands for the same transaction and the buyer's appeals were pending before CIT(A), the tribunal ruled these appeals were inextricably linked and could not be decided independently. The matter was remanded to CIT(A) for fresh consideration alongside connected appeals. en-us Wed, 28 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 27 Jun 2024 08:57:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754611 ITAT Chennai set aside CIT(A) orders regarding additions under section 56(2)(ix) for forfeiture of advance received during property transfer negotiations. The tribunal found contradictory facts where the assessee claimed negotiations were ongoing while the alleged buyer denied entering any MoU or paying advance. Since the department made additions in both parties' hands for the same transaction and the buyer's appeals were pending before CIT(A), the tribunal ruled these appeals were inextricably linked and could not be decided independently. The matter was remanded to CIT(A) for fresh consideration alongside connected appeals. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 28 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754611