<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Appeal allowed: transfer of immovable property to spouse found sham, alleged consideration unsupported, capital gains addition deleted</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=91960</link>
    <description>ITAT allowed the appeal of the deceased assessee represented by his legal heir and deleted the addition treating alleged consideration on transfer of immovable property to the spouse as undisclosed capital gain. The Tribunal found the conveyance deed and sub-registrar endorsement recorded &quot;NIL&quot; consideration, the spouse&#039;s bank statements showed no source for the purported payment, and the spouse averred by affidavit that no amount was paid. The Tribunal held the payment to be a sham and observed the AO failed to examine the spouse as a separate assessee or consider legitimate alternatives such as family settlement or gift; accordingly the addition lacked prudence and was quashed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2025 08:41:03 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2025 08:41:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=846126" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Appeal allowed: transfer of immovable property to spouse found sham, alleged consideration unsupported, capital gains addition deleted</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=91960</link>
      <description>ITAT allowed the appeal of the deceased assessee represented by his legal heir and deleted the addition treating alleged consideration on transfer of immovable property to the spouse as undisclosed capital gain. The Tribunal found the conveyance deed and sub-registrar endorsement recorded &quot;NIL&quot; consideration, the spouse&#039;s bank statements showed no source for the purported payment, and the spouse averred by affidavit that no amount was paid. The Tribunal held the payment to be a sham and observed the AO failed to examine the spouse as a separate assessee or consider legitimate alternatives such as family settlement or gift; accordingly the addition lacked prudence and was quashed.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2025 08:41:03 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=91960</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>