TECHPARK HOTELS PVT LTD,GURGAON vs. ADDI. CIT SPECIAL RANGE-9, NEW DELHI

ITA 9450/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 March 2026AY 2015-16Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI VIMAL KUMAR (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT held that the AO erred in rejecting the Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) method of valuation used by the assessee, which was certified by a Chartered Accountant. The tribunal emphasized that valuation is not an exact science and the AO cannot arbitrarily reject a recognized valuation method without providing an alternative fair valuation.

What were the facts?

The assessee company received share application money and issued shares at a premium. The Assessing Officer (AO) made additions on account of alleged excessive premium received, invoking Section 56(2)(viib). The CIT(A) partly upheld these additions. The assessee appealed to the ITAT.

What were the issues?

Whether the AO can reject the assessee's valuation of shares using the DCF method and substitute it with the NAV method without cogent reasons. Whether business losses can be set off against income from other sources.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 56(2)(viib),Section 143(3),Section 250,Section 71,Section 234D

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(4)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘F’: NEW DELHI

For Appellant: Shri Neeraj Jain, Adv. and Shri Tavish Verma, Adv, Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra Sr. DR
Hearing: 20.01.2026Pronounced: 20.03.2026

PER VIMAL KUMAR, JM:

The appeal filed by the Assessee is against order dated 11.09.2019 of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), New Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’] arising out of assessment order dated 30.12.2017 of the Ld. Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) of the Act for Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed return declaring loss of Rs.23,06,28,106/- on 30.11.2015. Notice u/s 143(2) dated 22.09.2016 was issued. Notices u/s 142(1) were issued. Sh. Nikhil Agarwal & Shri Nirmal Malpani, CA appeared and filed details. On compl

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 56(2)(viib)

All 746 judgments and leading authorities on Section 56(2)(viib) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →