https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761651 ITAT Mumbai dismissed Revenue's appeal regarding additions under section 56(2)(x) for income from other sources based on stamp duty value differences. In the first case, CIT(A) correctly deleted the addition as the agreement date was 09.01.2012 with full consideration paid, and proviso to section 56(2)(x)(b)(B) allows stamp duty value determination based on agreement date when registration dates differ. In the second case involving sale of entire undertaking as going concern, CIT(A) properly applied the slum sale principle from R.C. Cooper and Premier Automobiles cases, holding section 56(2)(x) inapplicable to such transactions where individual asset values shouldn't be considered separately. en-us Tue, 12 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 13 Nov 2024 13:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761651 ITAT Mumbai dismissed Revenue's appeal regarding additions under section 56(2)(x) for income from other sources based on stamp duty value differences. In the first case, CIT(A) correctly deleted the addition as the agreement date was 09.01.2012 with full consideration paid, and proviso to section 56(2)(x)(b)(B) allows stamp duty value determination based on agreement date when registration dates differ. In the second case involving sale of entire undertaking as going concern, CIT(A) properly applied the slum sale principle from R.C. Cooper and Premier Automobiles cases, holding section 56(2)(x) inapplicable to such transactions where individual asset values shouldn't be considered separately. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 12 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761651