Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (2) TMI 102 - ITAT KOLKATAAddition towards share premium u/s 68 - Held that:- As decided in PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX VERSUS APEAK INFOTECH, YOGESH INFOTECH, AMPLY INFOTECH, WESTLINE TRADING COMPANY, JASPER COMMERCE, INEX INFOTECH [2017 (9) TMI 1590 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] the amount received on issue of share capital including premium are on capital account and cannot be considered to be income. The definition of income as provided under section 2(24) at the relevant time did not define as income any consideration received for issue of share in excess of its fair market value. This came into the statute only with effect from April 1, 2013 and thus, would have, no application to the share premium received by the assessee in the previous year relevant to the assessment year 2012-13. Similarly, the amendment to section 68 by addition of proviso was made subsequent to previous year relevant to the subject assessment year 2012-13 and cannot be invoked. This court in CIT v. Gagandeep Infrastructure (P.) Ltd. [2017 (3) TMI 1263 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] has while refusing to entertain a question with regard to section 68 of the Act has held that the proviso to section 68 of the Act introduced with effect from April 1, 2013 will not have retrospective effect and would be effective only from the assessment year 2013-14.- Decided in favour of assessee. Disallowance u/s 14A read with Rule 8D - Held that:- As there was no exempt income claimed by the assessee in the return of income and accordingly the provisions of section 14A of the Act cannot be made applicable at all . Cases followed - CHETTINAD LOGISTICS PVT. LTD. [2017 (4) TMI 298 - MADRAS HIGH COURT], HOLCIM INDIA P. LTD. [2014 (9) TMI 434 - DELHI HIGH COURT], CHEMINVEST LIMITED [2015 (9) TMI 238 - DELHI HIGH COURT] - decided in favour of assessee.
|