Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2018 (3) TMI 530

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... etitioners to file an application for stay of the order dated 21st December, 2017 passed by the Assessing Officer to the CIT (A) in its pending Appeal. In the above circumstances, there would be a stay of the order dated 21st December, 2017 to the extent of the demand raised for a period of 4 weeks from today. In case, the petitioner files a stay application to the CIT (A) within a period of 4 weeks from today, the demand of ₹ 62.38 crores arising consequent to the impugned order dated 21st December, 2017 is stayed till the stay application is disposed of and for a further period of 2 weeks thereafter. - Writ Petition No. 654 of 2018 - - - Dated:- 1-3-2018 - M. S. Sanklecha And Sandeep K. Shinde, JJ. Ms. Fereshte Sethna, Mr. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r Section 220(6) of the Act till the disposal of the Appeal by the CIT (A) and directed the petitioners to pay 20% of the demand and approach him later for deciding the schedule for payment of the balance demand. 4. Being aggrieved by the order dated 29th January, 2018, the petitioners approached this Court by way of a Writ Petition No. 389 of 2018. This Court, by an order dated 9th February, 2018 adjourned the hearing of the petition to 16th February, 2018. In the meantime, the petitioners were directed to file its application for stay before the Commissioner of Income Tax. This was in view of the Circular dated 29th February, 2016 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes which provides that in case, the petitioner's application .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Tax Rules, 1902 (Rules) as it provides an option to the Assessee to arrive at a fair market value of the shares either by the method as prescribed in Rule 11UA(2)(a) of the Rules i.e. NAV Method or in terms of Rule 11(2)(b) of the Rules i.e. DCF Method. 6. In exercise of the above option, the petitioners had provided a valuation report dated 11th March, 2015 as required of a Merchant Banker which determines the fair market value of shares at ₹ 24.79 on adoption of DCF Method. The Assessing Officer did not accept the valuation report dated 11th March, 2015 as provided by the Merchant Banker to arrive at the fair market value of the shares on the DCF Method as according to him, the report was not credible. However, the Assessing Off .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... in respect of Assessment Year 2015-16, the sales of the other years were as on the basis of estimate. Therefore, at the time the Assessment order was passed on 21st December, 2017, the actual sales for three years appeared to be much lower than the projected sales. This inflation of projected sales had resulted in enhancing the fair market value of the shares by the DCF Method thus not proper. It is submitted that, even if the DCF method is applied on the basis of the correct figures, some amount of demand would still be payable. 8. Before dealing with the merits, it must be noted that the impugned order dated 23rd February, 2018 has enhanced the payment of 20% of the disputed demand as directed by the Assessing Officer in his order dat .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ne a fresh valuation either by himself or by calling for a final determination from an independent valuer to confront the petitioner. However, the basis has to be the DCF Method and it is not open to him to change the method of valuation which has been opted for by the Assessee. If Mr. Mohanty is correct in his submission that a part of demand arising out of the assessment order dated 21st December, 2017 would on adoption of DCF Method will be sustained in part, the same is without working out the figures. This was an exercise which ought to have been done by the Assessing Officer and that has not been done by him. Infact, he has completely disregarded the DCF Method for arriving at the fair market value. Therefore, the demand in the facts .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates