Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2013 (12) TMI 1368

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... A) needs to take a consistent stand in this regard and is required to pass a speaking order considering the fact that the same income should not be taxed twice - The issue was restored for adjudication. - I.T.A. No.7729/M/2011, I.T.A. No.1251/M/2013, I.T.A. No.720/M/2013 - - - Dated:- 20-12-2013 - Shri D. Karunakara Rao And Shri Vivek Varma,JJ. For the Appellant : Shri Rajiv Khandelwal For the Respondent : Shri Ritesh Misra, DR ORDER Per D. Karunakara Rao, AM: There are three appeals under consideration and they are filed by the assessee against the separate orders of the CIT (A)-19 and CIT (A)-6, Mumbai for the assessment years 2008-09 and 2009-2010. Since, the issues raised in all the three appeals are interconnected, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ould be appreciated considering the binding High Court judgment in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax Vs Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. (Bom) 313 ITR 340. Further, he mentioned that the CIT (A) has ignored the assessee's written submissions filed before him. In this regard, he relied on the contents of sub-para (f) of para 1.3 of the said written submissions filed by the assessee. Further, Ld Counsel also brought our attention to the various pages of the paper book to demonstrate that the assessee has received interest free funds from MW Infra Holding Pvt Ltd; Triveni Management Consultancy Services and Global Absolute Research Pvt Ltd (page 15 of the paper book is relevant in this regard). However, he could not demonstrate the exact .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... eceipt of this order, after hearing the assessee in accordance with the set principles of natural justice. Accordingly, ground no.1 of ITA No.7729/M/2011 and other grounds raised in ITA No.1251/M/2013 are allowed for statistical purposes. 5. Ground no.2 of appeal ITA No. 7729/M/2011 relates to the addition of Rs.40 lacs. In this regard, Ld Counsel mentioned that assessee acquired certain shares @ Rs.45/- per share from the existing shareholders of Midvally Entertainment Ltd. These shares were sold conditionally during the pre- IPO (initial public offer) period of the said company @ Rs. 65/- per share and there is a share transaction agreement dated 18.10.2007 to support the same (Page 37 to 55 of the paper book is relevant in this regard) .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... xed in the AY 2008-2009. 6. On the other hand, Ld DR has, in principle, no objection for remanding the matter to the files of the AO so long the profits are properly offered in any one of the Assessment Year. 7. We have heard both the parties and perused the orders of the Revenue Authorities as well as the record placed before us. On hearing of both the parties on this issue, we find that this is a case of taxing the profits in two assessment years i.e., (i) on account of assessee's own offer in the AY 2009-2010; and (ii) on account of taxation by the Assessing Officer. In principle, this cannot be appreciated that assessee as such is ready to offer the income in one year and not in two assessment years. If the sale consideration is tak .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 962 are applicable even to the shares held as stock-in-trade. On hearing the parties and after considering the Ld Counsel's oral request before us, we proceed to dismiss the said ground as not pressed. Accordingly, ground no.1 is dismissed as not pressed. 11. Referring to the ground no.2 that the same needs to revisit the files of the CIT (A) as the said ground is identical to the second limb of the ground no.1 of the appeal ITA No. 7729/M/2011. Considering the same, we accordingly set aside the order of the CIT (A) in this regard and the ground no.2 is allowed for statistical purposes with identical directions. 12. Ground no.3 raised in this appeal is exactly akin to the ground no.2 of the ITA No. 7729/M/2011. While adjudicating the sa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates