Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2022 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (2) TMI 1333 - AT - Income TaxAddition u/s 56(2)(viib) - Method adopted by the assessee for determining the FMV of shares - excess consideration received by the assessee for issue of shares, to the extent the consideration received exceeded the Fair Market Value of shares - HELD THAT:- The facts of the case are that the assessee had issued 60,000/- shares of face value 10 at the premium of Rs. 90. To justify its valuation, the assessee had submitted valuation report by C.A. in which the land and building were valued at their market value as on the date of issue of shares. The market value of land and building was also duly substantiated by a valuation report. The revenue has rejected the valuation report of the shares stating that the assessee ought to have valued the fair market value of the shares only as per the method prescribed under Rule 11UA of the Act rules of Income Tax Rules, 1961. The method adopted by the assessee for determining the FMV of shares issued during the year is held to be in accordance with law. The decisions relied upon by the CIT(A) of the ITAT Delhi in the case of Agro Portfolio(p) Ltd. [2018 (5) TMI 1088 - ITAT DELHI] is clearly not applicable in the present case since it related to the applicability of NAV method or DCF method for valuation of shares, which is not the issue in the present case. The decision of the ITAT Hyderabad in the case of Medplus Health Services P .Ltd [2016 (3) TMI 549 - ITAT HYDERABAD] has we find been incorrectly interpreted by the CIT(A) to apply to the facts of the present case since the ITAT in the said case had rejected the adoption of market value of shares as fair market value and held that the same has to be determined as provided in law. The addition therefore made by the revenue authorities u/s. 56(2)(viib) of the Act is be held not sustainable in law and we direct deletion of the same. Employees' Provident Fund paid belatedly - disallowance of employees contribution to Provident Fund deposited belatedly, as per section 2(24)(x) of the Act r.w.s 36(1)(va) - HELD THAT:- Assessee fairly admitted that this issue was covered against the assessee by the decision of Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation [2014 (1) TMI 502 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT]. In view of the above, the disallowance of Employees’ Provident Fund paid belatedly is upheld.
|