TMI Blog2022 (9) TMI 696X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... therefore, the AO has taken the FMV, correctly, as per Rules and this argument is not tenable. BPPL has gone Into winding up - Scope of Subsequent development - Subsequent development that value of such shares become nil, cannot be considered nor this was stated in assessment proceedings. Further, if there was no real value of these shares, the receiving of 90,000 shares of BPPL against allotment of shares of other companies is not justified, Therefore, this argument of the appellant has no force and deserves to be rejected. Shares have been allotted at a premium, therefore the provisions of section 56(2)(viib) will be applicable and not the provisions of section 56(2)(vila) - This argument of appellant is also not tenable due to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f difference of Rs. 202.13 per share and made addition of Rs. 1,81,91,344/-. 5. Assessee strongly agitated the matter before the CIT(A). It was strongly contended that if the FMV determined by the AO is considered as income then the value of share allotted will automatically have the same effect, therefore, no addition is called for. 6. After considering the facts and the submissions the CIT(A) held as under:- 7.10 In this regard it is seen that the appellant has taken this logic, after considering the enhanced value of shares, However, the value of share is to be taken as per FMV, just before the transfer of shares, where this comes to Rs. 1202/- against which the appellant has shown book value of shares at Rs. 1000/- for each sh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... receiving of 90,000 shares of BPPL against allotment of shares of other companies is not justified, Therefore, this argument of the appellant has no force and deserves to be rejected, 7.13 The appellant also contended that since the shares have been allotted at a premium, therefore the provisions of section 56(2)(viib) will be applicable and not the provisions of section 56(2)(vila). 7.14 This argument of appellant is also not tenable due to the reason that the shares have been transferred for inadequate consideration and FMV, as worked out In accordance with Rule 11UA is higher than the consideration received. Therefore, the provisions of section 56(2)(viia) is duly applicable In the case of appellant, 7.15 With regard to t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
