<?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 (10) TMI 259 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=800316</link>
    <description>The provisos to section 56(2)(vii)(b) permit use of the stamp-duty value on an earlier agreement date only where that agreement fixes consideration for the same immovable property ultimately transferred and consideration, wholly or partly, is paid through a non-cash mode on or before that date. A booking agreement for a different old-building flat, with separate consideration, did not establish either requirement for the redeveloped flat registered later. As no prior agreement fixed the registered consideration for the transferred property, and no legally established payment linkage was shown, the concessional valuation date was unavailable. The addition for excess stamp-duty value over registered consideration was sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 31 Aug 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Oct 2026 08:13:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=927872" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (10) TMI 259 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=800316</link>
      <description>The provisos to section 56(2)(vii)(b) permit use of the stamp-duty value on an earlier agreement date only where that agreement fixes consideration for the same immovable property ultimately transferred and consideration, wholly or partly, is paid through a non-cash mode on or before that date. A booking agreement for a different old-building flat, with separate consideration, did not establish either requirement for the redeveloped flat registered later. As no prior agreement fixed the registered consideration for the transferred property, and no legally established payment linkage was shown, the concessional valuation date was unavailable. The addition for excess stamp-duty value over registered consideration was sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 31 Aug 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=800316</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>