https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93449 ITAT upholds the addition under section 56(2)(vii)(b), holding the transactions to be two distinct purchases rather than a continuation of a single agreement; consequently the proviso to section 56(2)(vii)(b) is inapplicable and the taxpayer's claim of non-monetary consideration is rejected. The Tribunal finds the adjustment of payments between contracts constituted a financing mechanism and did not alter the separate contractual nature of each transaction. However, because the earlier agreement was cancelled and the taxpayer's rights extinguished constituting a transfer within section 2(47), the matter is remitted to the AO to determine loss arising on cancellation and to allow set-off/carry-forward as permissible after affording opportunity to the taxpayer. Appeal partly allowed for statistical purposes. en-us Fri, 17 Oct 2025 09:54:28 +0530 Fri, 17 Oct 2025 09:54:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93449 ITAT upholds the addition under section 56(2)(vii)(b), holding the transactions to be two distinct purchases rather than a continuation of a single agreement; consequently the proviso to section 56(2)(vii)(b) is inapplicable and the taxpayer's claim of non-monetary consideration is rejected. The Tribunal finds the adjustment of payments between contracts constituted a financing mechanism and did not alter the separate contractual nature of each transaction. However, because the earlier agreement was cancelled and the taxpayer's rights extinguished constituting a transfer within section 2(47), the matter is remitted to the AO to determine loss arising on cancellation and to allow set-off/carry-forward as permissible after affording opportunity to the taxpayer. Appeal partly allowed for statistical purposes. Highlights Income Tax Fri, 17 Oct 2025 09:54:28 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93449