https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784383 Section 56(2)(vii)(b)(i) applies only where the recipient is an individual or an HUF, and not to a company. Since the assessee was admittedly a company, the ITAT held that the AO lacked statutory authority to treat the difference between the documented consideration for flats and their market value as income under s.56(2)(vii)(b)(i). Relying on binding HC precedent, the ITAT deleted the addition made by the AO and sustained by the first appellate authority, and allowed the appeal. en-us Thu, 01 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 03 Jan 2026 08:03:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784383 Section 56(2)(vii)(b)(i) applies only where the recipient is an individual or an HUF, and not to a company. Since the assessee was admittedly a company, the ITAT held that the AO lacked statutory authority to treat the difference between the documented consideration for flats and their market value as income under s.56(2)(vii)(b)(i). Relying on binding HC precedent, the ITAT deleted the addition made by the AO and sustained by the first appellate authority, and allowed the appeal. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 01 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784383