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

2019 (8) TMI 442

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... red various submissions made by the appellant/Petitioner. Similarly, in the M. P. filed by the assessee for A. Y. 2015 - 16, it is stated that the tribunal has not adjudicated Ground No. 3 & 5 of the Original Grounds of Appeal and Ground Nos. 1, 2 and 3 of the Additional Grounds of Appeal. 2. In the course of hearing of these M. Ps., same contentions are reiterated. In addition to this, it was submitted by the learned AR of the assessee that it is stated in para 2 on page 3 of the M. P. for a. Y. 2014 - 15 that the relevant provisions of section 56 in particular clause 2 of the Proviso to section 56 (2) (viib) provide for option to the assessee to adopt any method of valuation and do not provide for any discretion to the AO to change the m .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... f Hon'ble Allahabad High Court rendered in the case of CIT vs. Raza Hussain Contractor in ITA No. 189 of 2009 dated 03.10.2012. He submitted a copy of this judgment and drawn my attention to Para 13 thereof. He pointed out that in this para, it is held that it is not necessary to any judicial or quasi-judicial authority to meet each and every grounds and such authority is required to decide only those grounds which were pressed before it. 3. I have considered the rival submissions. First I examine and decide the second aspect of the arguments advanced by the learned AR of the assessee wherein he argued in respect of Notification dated 14.06.2016, clause (ii) of the proviso to clause (viib) of sub section (2) of section 56 of Income tax Act .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 4. Now I consider and decide the issues raised in the body of these M. Ps. in respect of not deciding of certain grounds. In this regard, I find that in A. Y. 2014 - 15, this is the contention that in respect of section 56 (2) (viib) issue, Ground No. 5 of original grounds and Ground No. 1, 2 and 3 of additional grounds are not decided. In this regard, I find that there is no merit in this claim that these grounds are not decided. The claim as per Ground No. 5 is this that the assessee can adopt any method of valuation of shares. This is admitted position of facts that the assessee adopted DCF method of valuation of shares. The assessee adopted the value of shares at Rs. 400/- per share and in support thereof, the assessee submitted a repo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... value of shares at Rs. 714.38 per share as per NAV method as against the value of premium of Rs. 1528.55 per share as per assessee's valuation report dated 02.05.2014 based on DCF method. In Ground No. 5 of this year also, similar issue is raised that the Act allowed the assessee to adopt any method of valuation and as per additional ground no. 3 raised in this year, this is the contention raised that the AO cannot adopt NAV method of valuation. I find that this valuation report dated 02.05.2014 is available on pages 95 to 107 of the paper book. This valuation report is prepared by M/s Amarnath Kamath & Associates, Chartered Accountants. The audited accounts of the assessee company for the year ending as on 31.03.2014 dated 30.08.2014 is av .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the income determined by the AO at Rs. 16.48 lacs is equal to 69.33% of gross receipts and Rs. 13,72,337/- by CIT (A) equal to 57.95% of gross receipts without rejecting the books of account by the AO/CIT (A) u/s 145 (3) and therefore, both these orders are unlawful and arbitrary. The assessee filed a M. P. before the tribunal that this ground was not decided and the tribunal recalled that tribunal order to decide this ground. Against this tribunal order, the revenue filed appeal before Hon'ble Allahabad High Court. Under these facts, it was held by Hon'ble Allahabad High Court that it is not necessary to any judicial or quasi-judicial authority to meet each and every grounds and such authority is required to decide only those grounds whic .....

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