KEEP LEARNING RESOURCES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-12(1)(4), MUMBAI

“Ld. CIT(A) as erred in law as well as in facts in confirming addition made by Ld. assessing officer u/s. 56(2 2. )(viib) in case of the appellant. Appellant crave leave to add, amend or withdraw any ground of appeal.” 3. The appellant has raised additional grounds of appeal and requested the bench to consider the additional evidence within the scope of rule 29 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rule, 1963 on the ground that the appellant could not submit the following evidences before the Ld. assessing officer because the same was not available during the course of assessment proceedings. a. Copy of Addendum to Valuation Report b. Copy of offer letter of the promoters has first offered for buyback of shares. 4. It is found that the Hon'ble Coordinate Bench of Hon'ble ITAT, Mumbai”H” Bench, Mumbai in the case of assessee itself vide ITA No.1692/M/2023 dated 31/08/2023 for the A.Y 2014-15 has already confirmed the order of the AO/Ld. CIT (A) who have rightly added the difference in share price u/s.56(2)(viib) of the Income Tax Act on the ground that the shares were allotted at more than the value determined by the auditor in his valuation report. 5. However, the appellant brought before us under Rule 29 fresh evidence i.e., the copy of addendum to valuation report and copy of