https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780076 ITAT MUMBAI - AT confirmed the addition under section 56(2)(vii)(b), holding the transactions were two separate, independent purchases (original flat cancelled, new agreement executed) and the proviso to s.56(2)(vii)(b) did not apply; adjustment of prior payment was a financing mechanism and non-monetary consideration claim was rejected. The Tribunal, however, remitted the matter to the AO to determine loss arising from extinguishment of rights on cancellation (s.2(47)) and allow appropriate set-off/carry-forward after due opportunity. Appeal partly allowed for statistical purposes. en-us Fri, 03 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 17 Oct 2025 09:53:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780076 ITAT MUMBAI - AT confirmed the addition under section 56(2)(vii)(b), holding the transactions were two separate, independent purchases (original flat cancelled, new agreement executed) and the proviso to s.56(2)(vii)(b) did not apply; adjustment of prior payment was a financing mechanism and non-monetary consideration claim was rejected. The Tribunal, however, remitted the matter to the AO to determine loss arising from extinguishment of rights on cancellation (s.2(47)) and allow appropriate set-off/carry-forward after due opportunity. Appeal partly allowed for statistical purposes. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 03 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780076