9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Sustaining an addition of Rs. 36,46,610 made on account of valuation of quoted shares held as investment. Issue-wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Sustaining an Addition of Rs. 36,46,610 on Account of Valuation of Quoted Shares Held as Investment: The primary issue in the appeal is whether the CIT(A) was justified in sustaining an addition of Rs. 36,46,610 based on the valuation of quoted shares held as investment. The facts reveal that the assessee filed a return declaring an income of Rs. 4,38,643 from dividends, interest, and miscellaneous income. During the scrutiny, the assessee failed to comply with notices issued under sections 143(2) and 142(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Consequently, the Assessing Officer (AO) completed the assessment under section 144 of the Act, noting a discrepancy between the market value and the book value of shares of Shriram Pistons and Rings Ltd. The AO observed that the market value of 8,75,640 quoted shares as on 31-3-2001 was Rs. 31.55 per share, totaling Rs. 69,06,610, whereas the value shown in the balance sheet was Rs. 32,60,000. The AO attributed the difference of Rs. 36,46,610 to the valuation of shares and made an addition on this basis. The assessee contended before the CIT(A) that the shares were consistently valued at cost, as per the method followed in previous years, and the market value disclosed in the notes to accounts was merely for shareholder information. The CIT(A) referred the matter for a remand report, which confirmed the assessee's method of valuation at cost price. However, the CIT(A) upheld the AO's addition, relying on Supreme Court judgments in CIT v. Dalmia Investment Co. and CIT v. Gold Mohore Investment Co. Ltd., which dealt with the valuation of bonus shares. The CIT(A) concluded that the receipt of bonus shares resulted in a gain to the assessee, thus constituting taxable income. Upon appeal, the assessee reiterated that the shares were held as investments and not stock-in-trade, and the resultant surplus from the sale of shares in previous years was treated as long-term capital gains. The assessee argued that the mere receipt of bonus shares did not result in an accrual of profits, as no shares were sold in the relevant accounting year. The assessee cited Supreme Court judgments in Hunsur Plywood Works Ltd. v. CIT and CIT v. Madan Gopal Radhey Lal, which supported the contention that bonus shares do not constitute immediate taxable income. The Tribunal examined the facts and found no evidence that the shares were treated as stock-in-trade. The Tribunal noted that the addition was based on the valuation of bonus shares, not on the sale of shares. The Tribunal held that the CIT(A)'s reliance on the judgment in Raja Mohan Raja Bahadur v. CIT was misplaced, as it pertained to money lending business and not to the issue of bonus shares. The Tribunal concluded that the shares were held as investments, and no capital gain could be taxed merely on the receipt of bonus shares without a transfer of the capital asset. The Tribunal emphasized that under section 45 of the Act, capital gains are taxable only upon the transfer of a capital asset. Since there was no transfer in the relevant year, no capital gain accrued to the assessee. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the order of the CIT(A) and deleted the addition of Rs. 36,46,610, allowing the appeal in favor of the assessee.
|
