https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770538 ITAT Delhi allowed the assessee's appeal, deleting additions made under section 28(iv) as benefit/perquisite for shares received as loan. The tribunal held that commercial consideration is implicit to invoke section 28(iv), and without quid pro quo element, no benefit accrues to the assessee. The CIT(A)'s reasoning was found baseless as no waiver of loan recovery was established. Additionally, section 41(1) was inapplicable as trading liability continued to exist without remission. Consequently, adjustments to book profit for MAT liability under section 115JB were also unsustainable. en-us Fri, 11 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 13 May 2025 09:17:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770538 ITAT Delhi allowed the assessee's appeal, deleting additions made under section 28(iv) as benefit/perquisite for shares received as loan. The tribunal held that commercial consideration is implicit to invoke section 28(iv), and without quid pro quo element, no benefit accrues to the assessee. The CIT(A)'s reasoning was found baseless as no waiver of loan recovery was established. Additionally, section 41(1) was inapplicable as trading liability continued to exist without remission. Consequently, adjustments to book profit for MAT liability under section 115JB were also unsustainable. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 11 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770538