ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. MR. GUN NIDHI DALMIA, NEW DELHI

ITA 3776/DEL/2009Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 July 2023AY 2006-0719 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the expenses incurred for professional services in facilitating the transfer of shares were allowable as they were supported by documentary evidence. Regarding the Rs. 7.2 crore, the Tribunal found that the assessee's claim of it being part of sale consideration for shares was not adequately addressed by the AO. On the FMV of shares, the Tribunal found the AO's method of valuation flawed and upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to consider a higher FMV.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed expenses for the transfer of shares, which the Assessing Officer (AO) found unreasonable and disallowed partially. The Commissioner (Appeals) granted further relief. The AO also added Rs. 7.2 crore as income from other sources, which the assessee claimed as capital gains. The AO determined the Fair Market Value (FMV) of shares at Rs. 10 as on 01.04.1981, while the assessee claimed a higher FMV.

What were the issues?

Whether the expenses claimed for share transfer are allowable, and how the sale consideration and Fair Market Value of shares should be determined.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 48,Section 55(2)(b),Section 2(22B)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(3)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: ‘C’ NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY & SHRI M. BALAGANESH

Hearing: 02.05.2023Pronounced: 31.07.2023

Captioned are two appeals by Revenue in respect of two

different assessees arising out of two separate orders of learned

Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-XXVI, New Delhi,

pertaining to assessment year 2006-07. Since the issues involved

in both the appeals are more or less common, they have been ITA No.3776/Del/2009 & 4268/Del/2010

clubbed together and disposed of by a common order, for the sake

of convenience.

2.

The grounds raised by the Revenue in this appeal are as under:

(A). Ld. CIT(A) has erred in allowing relief of Rs.23,62,750/- out of expenses cla

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 48

All 1,457 judgments and leading authorities on Section 48 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →