SHRI BRIJESH KUMAR ANAND,NEW DELHI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANAJI

ITA 8/PAN/2022Status: DisposedITAT Panaji27 February 2026AY 2011-12Bench: HON’BLE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE (Judicial Member), SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI (Accountant Member)24 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal held that the assessees failed to provide conclusive evidence that the share transactions occurred in AY 2010-11. The shareholder lists as of March 31, 2011, included the assessees' names, while the list for March 31, 2010, did not. Therefore, the additions made under Section 56(2)(vii) for AY 2011-12 were confirmed.

What were the facts?

The assessees, Brijesh Kumar Anand and Manoj Anand, purchased equity shares of M/s Advantage Software Pvt. Ltd. (ASPL) at face value. A search revealed that the Net Asset Value (NAV) of these shares was significantly higher than the face value. The Assessing Officer (AO) made additions under Section 56(2)(vii) for the difference between NAV and face value, treating the transaction as occurring in AY 2011-12.

What were the issues?

The key legal issue was the correct assessment year for the acquisition of equity shares and the applicability of Section 56(2)(vii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, based on the difference between the Net Asset Value and the face value of the shares.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 56(2)(vii),Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 132,Section 250,Section 253(1),Section 246A,Section 249

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)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, PANAJI BENCH, GOA

Before: HON’BLE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE & SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI

For Appellant: Mr Shrinivas Nayak & Mr Narcinva Lotlikar [‘Ld. AR’]
For Respondent: Mr Naveen Kumar [‘Ld. DR’]
Pronounced: 27/02/2026

PER G. D. PADMAHSHALI; Against the DIN & Order No. ITBA/APL/M/250/2021- 22/1039025376(1) and 1039024958(1) both dt. ITAT-Panaji Brijesh Kumar Anand & Manoj Anand Vs ACIT, Goa ITA No.: 008 & 009/PAN/2022 AY: 2011-12 24/01/2022 passed u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [‘the Act’] by the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals-2, Pa

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)(vii)

All 365 judgments and leading authorities on Section 56(2)(vii) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →