Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2020 (9) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (9) TMI 1021 - HC - Income TaxIncome from other sources u/s 56(2)(viib) - determining the share value of the premium - Method of valuation of shares - variation in value of shares to the extent of ten times between value adopted by the assessee company as against its actual value of underlying assets - assessee has adopted a method prescribed by the Income Tax Act, without considering the fact that the value of shares adopted by the assessee (under discounted case flow method) does not reflect the true market value of the shares on that date - assessee adopted the DCF method as available under Rule 11UA of the Rules for arriving at the value of the shares allotted and the share premium received - ao adopted the NAV method and re-valued the land owned by the assessee company for the purpose of determining the share value of the premium thereof - HELD THAT:- Noting that the AO had discarded the DCF method adopted by the assessee on the ground that the actual revenue varied from the projected revenue for four years, the Tribunal rightly noted that the projected value is an estimate and the variation in the estimate is marginal. Tribunal came to the conclusion that there was no material to hold that the assessee's projected sales revenues are fabricated or manipulated. As pointed out that the Assessing Officer did not point out any flaw in the method of calculation of the value of shares by adopting the DCF method but, out rightly rejected the same, which should not have been done. Revenue by relying upon the decision of CIT vs. M/s.Vaani Estates Pvt. Ltd. [2019 (5) TMI 952 - MADRAS HIGH COURT]submitted that the matter may be remanded to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration to determine the fair market value of the shares in question as required in Explanation to Section 5 but said judgment, the matter was remanded to the AO for fresh consideration on a concession extended by the assessee by submitting that they will seek necessary clarification from the Central Board of Direct Taxes and they may be permitted to do so while the matter could be remanded back to the assessing authority. Therefore, a direction issued based on the concession extended by the assessee cannot be relied upon by the Revenue as a precedent. - Decided in favour of assessee.
|