9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (8) TMI 861X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ck route as per extant rules could not be said to be a colorable device. The cited decision of Hon ble High Court of Bombay in Capgemini India P. Ltd. [ 2015 (4) TMI 1069 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT ] clearly support this proposition. We also concur with other observations of Ld. CIT(A), in the impugned order. Accordingly, we find no reason to interfere in the impugned order, on this issue. The grounds thus raised stand dismissed. - ITA No. 277/Chny/2017 - - - Dated:- 17-8-2022 - HON BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH , VICE PRESIDENT AND HON BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL , AM Assessee by : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan ( Advocate ) - Ld. AR Revenue by : Shri Guru Bashyam ( CIT ) - Ld. DR ORDER Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ( Accountant Member ) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has never given clear break up of investments along with the statistics from own funds and from borrowed funds during the assessment proceedings. 2.5 The learned CIT(A) ought to have taken into consideration that the decision relied on in the case of M/s. TVS Motors Company Limited in AY 2010-11 has not been accepted by the Department and appeal filed before Hon'ble Madras High Court is pending as on date. 3.1 The learned CIT(A) erred in allowing the assessee's claim of sale of shares belongs to its sister concern, M/s. TVS Finance and Services Limited at price of Rs.12.86 per share is acceptable whereas the same shares were sold by one, Smt. Mallika Srinivasan, wife of one director of the assessee company for a conside ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e issues arise for our consideration- (i) disallowance u/s 14A; (ii) Computation of Profit on sale of shares; (iii) Long-Term Capital Loss on buy back of shares. 2. The registry has noted a delay of 8 days in the appeal, the condonation of which has been sought by the revenue. Considering the period of delay, the delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication on merits. 3. The Ld. CIT-DR advanced arguments and supported the assessment framed by Ld. AO whereas Ld. AR controverted the same and relied on the adjudication of Ld. CIT(A) in the impugned order. Having heard rival submissions and after going through the orders of lower authorities, our adjudication to the issues would be as under. The assessee being resident ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Rs.25/- per share and computed Long-Term Capital Gains (LTCG) of Rs.143.19 Lacs. 5.2 Similarly, the assessee sold shares of M/s Harita Tech Serv Ltd. (HTSL) (formerly known as TVS e-technologies Ltd. and Harita TVS Technologies Ltd.). The financial statements of that entity were perused for AY 2006-07 to 2009-10 which revealed that the assessee made investment in this entity during AYs 2006-07 and 2008-09 despite the fact that this entity was incurring losses. Therefore, current sale of shares by the assessee was held to be colorable device to offset the capital gain booked by the assessee during the year. Finally, the losses thus claimed by the assessee was disallowed. 5.3 During appellate proceedings, the assessee submitted that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ices is determined based on the negative book value of shares and therefore, are realistic price for transfer of shares. The AO did not establish that there was understatement of sales consideration. 5.4 The aforesaid arguments find favor with Ld. CIT(A) who reversed the stand of Ld. AO, inter-alia, in terms of cited decision of the Tribunal. Aggrieved the revenue is in further appeal before us. 5.5 We find that this issue stood covered in assessee s favor by the cited decision of Tribunal in case of other promoter and therefore, no interference is required in the impugned order, in this regard. We concur with the adjudication of Ld. CIT(A). The corresponding grounds raised by the revenue stand dismissed. 5.6 So far as Long-Term Ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
