9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (6) TMI 958X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he applicability of the same without referring the same, in our view is bad in law and therefore the said issue is required to be answered in favour of assessee and against the department. Thus, the issue No.1 is answered in favour of assessee and against the department. Cost of bonus shares taken at Rs.nil - the said bonus shares are issued prior to the amendment to S.55(2)(aa) - Held that:- As so far as the finding of the AO rejecting the claim of the appellant on the ground that the cost of the bonus shares is to be taken at NIL as per the amended provisions of law, in view of the judgment of the Constitutional Bench in case of CIT V. Gold Co. Ltd. [1969 (4) TMI 29 - SUPREME Court ] which has been referred to in Escorts Farms (Ramgarh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5(2)(aa) of the Act and when the original shares were sold prior to the assessment year under consideration, the average cost of the shares were taken into consideration and not the full cost while quantifying the capital gains. 3. The Assessing Officer has rejected the claim of the assessee as well as by the CIT (Appeals) and the ITAT. 4. While admitting the present appeal, the following substantial questions of law were raised: (i) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case the ITAT was right in law in holding that in case of slump sale of an undertaking, its corresponding WDV is required to be reduced from the remaining block and depreciation on such reduced block can only be allowed? (ii) Whether, in the facts and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Commissioner of Incometax 222 ITR 509 wherein judgment of the Constitutional Bench in case of CIT V. Gold Co. Ltd. [1970] 78 ITR 16 has been referred. He has therefore contended that the average share price ought to have been taken into account prior to amendment in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and subsequently amended law which was sought to be, but cannot be made retrospective effect, more particularly on 01/05/2000. 6. Learned Counsel Mr.Sudhir Mehta for the respondentDepartment has contended that the view taken by the tribunal is just and proper and same is confirmed by the decision of Delhi High Court in case of Commissioner of IncomeTax v. Dharmpal Satyapal [2016] 380 ITR 527 (Delhi) and has fur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
