S. 56 : Income from other sources-Gift from uncle-Constructive gift from uncle-Addition is deleted.[S. 56(2)(vii), 68]
P. Srinivasan. v. ITO (2023) 198 ITD 287/223 TTJ 902 (Chennai) (Trib.)S. 56 : Income from other sources-Gift from uncle-Constructive gift from uncle-Addition is deleted.[S. 56(2)(vii), 68]
P. Srinivasan. v. ITO (2023) 198 ITD 287/223 TTJ 902 (Chennai) (Trib.)S. 56 : Income from other sources-Valuation of shares-Premium-DCF method-Minor difference in projected and actual financials-Rejection of DCF method adopted is unjustified.[S. 56(2)(viib )
SB Industrial Engineering (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (2023) 198 ITD 282 /223 TTJ 651 (Chennai) (Trib.)S. 56 : Income from other sources-Stamp duty-Valuation report-Difference between DVO value and consideration paid for purchase of property was to be assessed as income of purchasers in terms of section 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Act. [S. 56(2)(vii)]
S. Ramesh. v. DCIT (2023) 198 ITD 275 (Chennai) (Trib.)S. 56 : Income from other sources-Shares issued at premium-Matter remanded to the Assessing Officer to consider the valuation report submitted by the assessee. [S. 56(2)(viib) R.11U, 11UA]
Jayshri Propack (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (2023) 198 ITD 17 (Ahd) (Trib.)S. 54F : Capital gains-Investment in a residential house-Two residential house-One unit co-owned by assessee and wife-Ownership of more than one house-Not absolute owner-Denial of exemption is not valid-Under construction house-Income cannot be assessed as income from house property-Till time of possession condition stipulated in clause (b) of proviso to section 54F(1) was not satisfied-Denial of exemption is not valid. [S. 22, 45]
Anant R Gawande. v. ACIT (2023) 198 ITD 58 (Mum) (Trib.)S. 54 : Capital gains-Profit on sale of property used for residence-claim of benefit could not be disallowed only on ground that same was not claimed in return-Commissioner (Appeals) have powers to consider claim of assessee which was left half way by Assessing Officer.[S. 139, 251]
ACIT v. Mayur Batra. (2023) 198 ITD 333 / 222 TTJ 526(Delhi) (Trib.)S. 54 : Capital gains-Profit on sale of property used for residence-Invested entire amount of sale consideration towards construction of new house-Delay of 31 days in depositing the amount in capital gains account-Denial of exemption is not justified. [S. 45, 139(1)]
ITO v. Vinod Gugnani. (2023) 198 ITD 233 (Delhi)(Trib.)S. 54 : Capital gains-Profit on sale of property used for residence-Purchase or construction-Exemption should be allowed if amount is invested on or before due date of filing of return under section 139(4).[S.45,54(2), 139(1),139(4)]
Dr. Dharmista Mehta. v. ITO (2023) 198 ITD 106 (Mum) (Trib.)S. 54 : Capital gains-Profit on sale of property used for residence-Purchase-Agricultural land which was to be converted into non-agricultural property-Amount paid to builder before filing of return-House is registered beyond prescribed period-Eligible to claim exemption. [S. 45]
Dr. Sheela Puttabuddi. v. ITO (2023) 198 ITD 48/223 TTJ 499 s (Bang) (Trib.)S. 45(2) : Capital gains-Conversion of a capital asset in to stock-in-trade-Long term capital gains at FMV computed by indexation of Stamp Duty Valuation as on date of sale, rather than entire sale consideration is justified-Jurisdiction of Commissioner (Appeals) does not extend to introducing an altogether new source of income.[S. 28(i), 45, 251]
Rangnathappa Govindappa Zharkhande v. ITO (2023) 198 ITD 290 / 225 TTJ 621 (Pune) (Trib.)