<?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>2026 (4) TMI 1015 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789946</link>
    <description>Receipts under a memorandum of understanding were treated as taxable income from other sources because the assessee could not show ownership or any subsisting enforceable right in the land, and the property had already been sold earlier. On that factual basis, the sums were not accepted as advance sale consideration. Reopening under Section 147 was also upheld because the Assessing Officer&#039;s reasons referred to the relevant transaction and receipt of money, and the incorrect quantum mentioned did not destroy the foundational belief that income had escaped assessment. The additions were sustained and the challenge to reassessment jurisdiction failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 13 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 Apr 2026 08:21:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=897164" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (4) TMI 1015 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789946</link>
      <description>Receipts under a memorandum of understanding were treated as taxable income from other sources because the assessee could not show ownership or any subsisting enforceable right in the land, and the property had already been sold earlier. On that factual basis, the sums were not accepted as advance sale consideration. Reopening under Section 147 was also upheld because the Assessing Officer&#039;s reasons referred to the relevant transaction and receipt of money, and the incorrect quantum mentioned did not destroy the foundational belief that income had escaped assessment. The additions were sustained and the challenge to reassessment jurisdiction failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789946</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>