https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762272 ITAT Delhi ruled in favor of the assessee regarding property transaction timing and tax provisions. The tribunal determined that despite property registration occurring in AY 2014-15, the actual transaction including agreement execution, substantial payment, and possession took place in AY 2013-14. ITAT held that CIT(A) incorrectly invoked section 56(2)(vii)(b)(ii) provisions amended effective from AY 2014-15 on a transaction pertaining to AY 2013-14. The tribunal deleted additions made under the amended provisions, clarifying that CIT(A)'s advisory to AO for reopening AY 2013-14 assessment had no binding value. en-us Tue, 26 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 27 Nov 2024 17:56:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762272 ITAT Delhi ruled in favor of the assessee regarding property transaction timing and tax provisions. The tribunal determined that despite property registration occurring in AY 2014-15, the actual transaction including agreement execution, substantial payment, and possession took place in AY 2013-14. ITAT held that CIT(A) incorrectly invoked section 56(2)(vii)(b)(ii) provisions amended effective from AY 2014-15 on a transaction pertaining to AY 2013-14. The tribunal deleted additions made under the amended provisions, clarifying that CIT(A)'s advisory to AO for reopening AY 2013-14 assessment had no binding value. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 26 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762272