S. 68 : Cash credits-Bogus donations-Cash deposited in banks-Addition is justified. [S. 35AC, 35AC(ii)]
Vaibhav Pankaj Shah v. ACIT (2024) 208 ITD 718 (Mum) (Trib.)S. 68 : Cash credits-Bogus donations-Cash deposited in banks-Addition is justified. [S. 35AC, 35AC(ii)]
Vaibhav Pankaj Shah v. ACIT (2024) 208 ITD 718 (Mum) (Trib.)S. 68 : Cash credits-Long term capital gains-Accommodation entries-Penny stock-Purchase of shares of LDPL and MARL in off-market transactions-Inordinate delay in dematerialization of those shares-Transaction is not genuine-Addition is justified. [S.10(38). 45]
Shailesh K. Patel HUF. v. ITO (2024) 208 ITD 539/ 231 TTJ 929/243 DTR 201 (Ahd) (Trib.)S. 68 : Cash credits-long-term capital gain-Sale of shares-Penny stock-Accommodation entries-Information from investigation Wing-Purchase in physical form-Decartelized-Purchase was made through Banking channels-Deletion of addition by CIT(A) is affirmed. [S. 10(38), 45]
ITO v. Prakashmal Malraj Jain. (2024) 208 ITD 403 (Mum) (Trib.)S. 68: Cash credits-Cash deposited in the Bank-Demonetization period-Merely because assessee had deposited said sourced income in form of SBNs during demonetization, same could not be considered as unexplained cash credits.
Shobha Tomar. v. DCIT (2024) 208 ITD 70 (Jaipur) (Trib.)S. 56 : Income from other sources-Valuation of shares-Valuation of shares of subsidiary company to determine FMV of holding company-DCF Method-Addition is deleted.[S.56(2)(viib), R.11UA(1)(c)(b)]
Leela Tourism and Heritage (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (2024) 208 ITD 751 (Delhi) (Trib.)S. 56 : Income from other sources-Purchase of flat-Immovable property-Date of allotment-Value as on date of allotment had to be treated as stamp duty value for purpose of provision of section 56(2)(x)-At that time payment made was more than stamp duty value, no addition could be made.[S. 56(2)(x)]
ITO v. Narendra Kumar Jain. (2024) 208 ITD 583 (Mum) (Trib.)S. 56 : Income from other sources-Agricultural income-Increasing the expenditure on estimate basis-Addition is deleted.[S.10(1)]
A.S. Srinath (HUF) v. ITO (2024) 208 ITD 39/114 ITR 15 (SN) (Bang) (Trib.)S. 54G : Capital gains-Shifting of industrial undertaking from urban area-Firm-Partner-Partner in partnership firm-New investment in partnership firm-Eligible for exemption. [S. 45, Wealth-tax Act, 1957, S. 5(1)(iv)]
Hasmukhbhai Makanbhai Padariya. v. ITO (2024) 208 ITD 322 (Rajkot) (Trib.)S. 54F : Capital gains-Investment in a residential house-Purchase of residential plot for construction of house-Exemption can not be denied on ground of technical constraint that no permission was granted by ADDA to transfer land in name of assessee till date of investment-Income from other sources-Value of land-Difference in value of land given by DVO and value of land mentioned by assessee in transfer deed was less than 5 per cent, no addition was warranted on account of differential amount between value of land given by DVO and value of land. [S. 45, 56(2)(viib)]
Basabdutta Dutta v. ITO (2024) 208 ITD 30 (Kol) (Trib.)S. 54 : Capital gains-Profit on sale of property used for residence-Sale deed refers possession of property was taken on 31-3-2015-With within period of one year before date of sale of original asset-Covenants in sale deed executed and registered were conclusive in absence of any evidence to contrary-Entitled for deduction.[S.54F]
Ramdas Sitaram Patil v. ACIT (2024) 208 ITD 620 (Pune) (Trib.)