What did the High Court hold?

The Tribunal allowed the assessees' appeals, finding in their favor against the revenue. This decision was based on the principle of consistency, as no error was pointed out in the DVO's fair market value determination for co-owners.

The assessees, part of the Tyagi Group, sold shares in Tyagi Anand & Co. Pvt. Ltd. The dispute centered on determining the capital gains, specifically the cost of acquisition of these shares. The fair market value of the shares, as determined by the DVO for co-owners (Anand Group), was not disputed by the revenue.

What were the issues?

The key issue was the determination of the cost of acquisition of shares for calculating capital gains. The Tribunal considered whether the fair market value determined by the DVO for co-owners should be applied to the assessees.

CIT vs Geeta Tyagi | Delhi High Court 2008

![](_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg)

4, 5, 10, 13, 14, 16 % 07.07.2008

Present:

74.

Ms Prem Lata Bansal for the Appellant.

Mr O. P. Sapra for the Respondent.

+ CM No. 7796/08 in ITA 664/2008, CM No. 7799/08 in ITA 665/2008, CM No. 7809/08 in ITA 670/2008, CM No. 7984/08 in ITA 687/2008 and CM No. 8353/08 in ITA 720/2008

Allowed subject to all just exceptions.

These six appeals arise out of the common order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal on 17.09.2001 in six different appeals. All the assessees belong to the group known as the Tyagi Group. The assessees held shares in Tyagi Anand & Co. Pvt. Ltd. In the assessment year 2001-02 the shares held by the members of the Tyagi Group were sold for consideration. There is no dispute with regard to the sale price of the shares. The question that arose before the Tribunal was with regard to the extent of capital gains at the hands of the assessees. This arose in the context of arriving at the cost of acquisition of the shares.

![](_page_1_Picture_1.jpeg)

![](_page_2_Picture_1.jpeg)

assessment order, nor in the order of CIT (A), nor during the course of hearing of the appeals before the Tribunal, any error had been pointed out in the fair market value worked out by the DVO, which had been worked out in respect of the cases of the co-owners (The Anand Group). It is in these circumstances that the Tribunal allowed the appeals of the assessees and returned a finding against the revenue. The Tribunal has adopted the policy of consistency and has returned a finding in favour of the assessees and against the revenue. We do not find any substantial question of law which arises for our consideration in these appeals. The appeals are dismissed.

fimplumed . BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J

RAJIV SHAKDHER. J

July 07, 2008 SR

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. GEETA TYAGI

What did the High Court hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments