https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784043 The dominant issue was whether land purchased in the assessee's name could be treated as having been acquired on behalf of a charitable society so as to negate addition under s.56(2)(vii)(b). The ITAT held that revenue records continued in the assessee's name, the MoU claiming purchase for the society was executed long after the sale deed and was treated as an afterthought, and there was no evidence that the property was reflected as the society's asset in its audited financial statements. On these facts, the authorities were justified in applying s.56(2)(vii)(b) to treat the differential value as taxable. The appeal was dismissed and the addition sustained. en-us Tue, 23 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 26 Dec 2025 11:08:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784043 The dominant issue was whether land purchased in the assessee's name could be treated as having been acquired on behalf of a charitable society so as to negate addition under s.56(2)(vii)(b). The ITAT held that revenue records continued in the assessee's name, the MoU claiming purchase for the society was executed long after the sale deed and was treated as an afterthought, and there was no evidence that the property was reflected as the society's asset in its audited financial statements. On these facts, the authorities were justified in applying s.56(2)(vii)(b) to treat the differential value as taxable. The appeal was dismissed and the addition sustained. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 23 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784043