<?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>Cash returned from recorded builder payments is not unexplained money absent proof of separate unaccounted accretion.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=104725</link>
    <description>Cash returned by builders from property payments made through banking channels constitutes circulation of explained funds, not unexplained money, unless evidence establishes a separate unexplained asset or accretion; the related addition was deleted. Alleged cash interest from builder financing was unsustainable where disclosed property investments, rent and capital gains supported appreciation rather than separate interest; that addition was deleted. Acquisition below stamp-duty value can attract section 56(2)(x)(b) irrespective of a transaction&#039;s builder-financing character, but disputed values require fair-market-value determination before taxability is decided; the issue was remanded. Set-off of brought-forward long-term capital loss was also remanded for verification of eligibility and the character of current-year capital gains.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 Oct 2026 11:00:21 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 Oct 2026 11:00:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=928831" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Cash returned from recorded builder payments is not unexplained money absent proof of separate unaccounted accretion.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=104725</link>
      <description>Cash returned by builders from property payments made through banking channels constitutes circulation of explained funds, not unexplained money, unless evidence establishes a separate unexplained asset or accretion; the related addition was deleted. Alleged cash interest from builder financing was unsustainable where disclosed property investments, rent and capital gains supported appreciation rather than separate interest; that addition was deleted. Acquisition below stamp-duty value can attract section 56(2)(x)(b) irrespective of a transaction&#039;s builder-financing character, but disputed values require fair-market-value determination before taxability is decided; the issue was remanded. Set-off of brought-forward long-term capital loss was also remanded for verification of eligibility and the character of current-year capital gains.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Oct 2026 11:00:21 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=104725</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>