9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 975X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as got the additional share capital allotment of ₹ 2,29,84,701/without bringing anything to the assignee. Therefore, the prerequisite laid down in section 47(xiv) has not been complied with. It is also pertinent to mention that the cases laws relied on by Ld.AR to justify the case of the assessee are distinguishable on facts as in the cases relied by the Ld.AR, a proper valuation of good will has been done prior to the transfer of assets. In view of that matter, we do not find any justifiable reason to interfere with the order of the Ld.CIT(A) confirming the addition/disallowance made by the AO on this count. We do not think that the Tribunal's view and in the backdrop of the peculiar facts can be termed as perverse or vitiated by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... proprietary concern, relating to the business immediately before the succession, have become the assets and liabilities of the Private Limited Company. Therefore, the view taken by the Tribunal requires consideration. 5. We are unable to agree with Mr. Tolat for more than one reason. The questions arise from ground No.1 in the Tribunal's order. The Tribunal had before it an appeal of the assessee directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), dated 4-10-2012. The Assessment Year in question is 2009-10. The assessee individual was proprietor of M/s. Overseas Plastic Moulders. During the year this sole proprietorship business was converted into a Private Limited Company. M/s. Overseas Plastic Moulders India Pri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ficer was confirmed in appeal by the First Appellate Authority. The Tribunal confirmed the view of the First Appellate Authority on facts and by assigning cogent and satisfactory reasons. In para 31 of the order under challenge, the Tribunal, at pages 19 and 20, has held thus: 3.1 Having heard both the sides and perused the material on record it is not disputed that the assessee was a proprietor of OPM and then he converted the same into a private limited company. Also it is not disputed that the good will generated has no mention in the books of OPM and is not a part of the assets and liabilities of the sole proprietary concern which has been succeeded by OPMIL. With the given factual background, it is relevant to mention that in par ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Therefore, the allotment of shares worth exceeding ₹ 1,16,05,939/is in the form of excess assets over the assets and liabilities of the assignor. In the light of the aforementioned discussions, after considering that the assessee's capital account in the OPM had the credit balance of ₹ 1,16,05,939/only and the assessee has been allotted fully paid up share capital worth ₹ 3,35,90,640/, we are of the considered opinion that the assessee has got the additional share capital allotment of ₹ 2,29,84,701/without bringing anything to the assignee. Therefore, the prerequisite laid down in section 47(xiv) has not been complied with. It is also pertinent to mention that the cases laws relied on by Ld.AR to justify the case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
