https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793789 Delay of 171 days in filing the appeal was condoned because the explanation, supported by affidavit, was found bona fide, reasonable and unintentional. On the merits, the addition under section 56(2)(x) could not survive where the difference between the declared consideration and the DVO-determined value was 9.23%, within the 10% safe harbour limit. The Tribunal applied the enhanced 10% tolerance introduced by the Finance Act, 2020 as operating retrospectively. The addition was deleted and the assessee succeeded on merits. en-us Tue, 19 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 24 Jun 2026 07:08:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793789 Delay of 171 days in filing the appeal was condoned because the explanation, supported by affidavit, was found bona fide, reasonable and unintentional. On the merits, the addition under section 56(2)(x) could not survive where the difference between the declared consideration and the DVO-determined value was 9.23%, within the 10% safe harbour limit. The Tribunal applied the enhanced 10% tolerance introduced by the Finance Act, 2020 as operating retrospectively. The addition was deleted and the assessee succeeded on merits. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 19 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793789