Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2016 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (8) TMI 1419 - AT - Income TaxGift of shares to company - transfer of capital - gift transaction - Applicability of provisions of section 56(vii)(a) - HELD THAT:- Equity interests are transferred by the assessee without consideration and it was a voluntary act. AO has not brought any adverse material against the above to conclude that the transactions involve the payment of consideration to the firm and the transfer of shares is not a voluntary act. In that sense, we find that the impugned Agreement dated 26.2.2010 has the required ingredients of the "gift" agreement. This view gets strength from the finding of Honble Ahmedabad High Court in the case of M/s. Prakriya Pharmachem vs. ITO [2016 (1) TMI 946 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] and the related transfer of shares constitutes an exempt transfer under the provisions of section 47(iii) of the Act. We have also perused the order of Honble Bombay High Court in the case of the recipient company NECL [2014 (4) TMI 480 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] during the Stay Petition related proceedings and find that the assessee's claim of gift agreement is prima facie approved. - assessee grounds are allowed. Gift transaction is done only between the biological persons and not the firms and the companies - HELD THAT:- The decision of the Tribunal in the case of DP World (P) Ltd [2012 (10) TMI 444 - ITAT MUMBAI] KDA Enterprises [2015 (4) TMI 9 - ITAT MUMBAI] are relevant for the legal proposition that the gifts transferred by the Indian company to the foreign company constitutes a valid gift and the transfer is an exempt transfer u/s 47(iii) of the Act. Further, we accept the Counsel‟s proposition that share transfer by way of gift is allowable u/s 56(2)(viia) & 56(2)(viib) - assessee grounds are allowed. Applicability of provisions of section 28(iv) of the Act. - HELD THAT:- These provisions imply the arising of any benefit / perquisite to the assessee-firm. On facts of the present case, we find, there is no such any benefit or perquisite to the assessee firm by transfer of shares of UPL and UEL to NCPL. Assessee is the transferor and gained nothing in the process. It is the finding of the CIT (A) that the assessee did not receive any consideration - assessee grounds are allowed. Disallowing maintenance charges claimed as a deduction while computing income under the head income from house property - Municipal Taxes and maintenance charges and claimed deduction - HELD THAT:- Tribunal in the case of Sharimila Tagore [2004 (6) TMI 591 - ITAT MUMBAI] considered the non-occupation charges paid to the society has the "depressing effect" on the ALV in the hands of the land lord of the property. Assessee now wants similar deduction at the time of calculating the ALV and not the deduction u/s 24. This appears to be a new argument raised by the Ld AR for the assessee. CIT (A) adjudicated this issue only from the point of view of section 24 and allowable deductions. In one view, this issue need re-adjudciation in the light of the new argument and the decision of the Tribunal (supra). Considering the above, we are of the opinion, this part of the ground needs to the remanded to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication. - Decided in favour of assessee for statistical purposes.
|