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 900 - AT - Income TaxLTCG - full value of consideration received on transfer of shares and its computation of LTCG - Held that:- A reading of clauses 2.1 & 2.2 of the Agreement dated 29.1.2010 between the parties, clearly shows that the liability of M/S.Khaitan & Co.Consulting Ltd., was not part of the consideration of sale of shares. It was an already existing liability in the books of the Assessee which was discharged by the Purchasers. The Purchasers took over that liability and M/S.Khaitan & Co.Consulting Ltd., acknowledged the Purchasers as their Creditor in so far as the sum of ₹ 4,97,25,928/- is concerned. On the facts of the present case, we are of the view that the sum of ₹ 4,97,25,928 cannot be attributed to consideration for sale of shares and the Assessee was justified in its claim that the said sum did not form part of the full value of consideration received on transfer of shares and its computation of LTCG was correct. We do not find any grounds to interfere with the decision of the CIT(A). - Decided against revenue Justification of holding the brokerage as expenditure of the company for sale of shares - Held that:- As we have already seen the sale of the property was sought to be achieved by sale of shares of M/S.Khaitan & Co.Consulting Ltd., which was held by the Assessee to the extent of 99.97%. The bill issued by the broker contained a description that it was sale of the property. In our view this description in the bill issued by the broker to whom commission was paid is insignificant. The fact remains and it is not disputed that Mr.Manish B.Thakkar, acted as an intermediary in the transaction and was paid brokerage. Capital gain declared by the Assessee arises out of the same transaction. In such circumstances, the claim of the Assessee for deduction could not have been refused by the AO. The CIT(A) in our view has rightly allowed the deduction claimed by the Assessee. We do not find any grounds to interfere with the order of the CIT(A).- Decided against revenue
|