Agro Portfolio Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO

171 ITD 74Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2018#4301 most cited

What is Agro Portfolio Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO authority for?

The Assessing Officer can scrutinize the valuation report submitted by an assessee and may, if necessary, determine a fresh valuation using the Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) method, even if the assessee opted for a different method, provided the assessee fails to substantiate their projections.

27

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2020 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Agro Portfolio Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO · section 56(2)(viib) · valuation of shares · DCF method · NAV method · fair market value · Assessing Officer · valuation report · Rule 11UA

Sections most often in play

Section 56(2)(viib)Section 143(3)Section 11UASection 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 68Section 11UA(2)(b)Section 131

Issues it is cited on

nav methoddcf methodsection 56(2)(viib)valuation of sharessection 56(2)section 56(2)(vii)(b)fair market valuesection 56(2)(vii)date of transfersection 56book profitsadvance tax

Judgments citing Agro Portfolio Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO

Valencia Nutrition Limited (Earlier Known As Valencia Nutrition Private Limited), Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 7(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 474/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Oct 2020AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K.And Shri B.R. Baskaran

For Appellant: Shri B.R. Sudheendra, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Manjeet Singh, D.R
Section 56(2)(viib)

…the basis has to be DCF method and he cannot change the method of valuation which has been opted by the ITA No.473&474/Bang/2020 M/s. Valencia Nutrition Limited, Bangalore Page 12 of 14 Assessee. The decision of ITAT, Delhi in the case of Agro Portfolio Ltd. 171 ITD 74 has also been considered by the ITAT, Bangalore in the case of VBHC Value Homes Pvt.Ltd.(supra). 20. The gist of the findings of the Assessing Officer and the ld. CIT(A) on the alleged discrepancies in the valuation report is as under: 1. Growth rate is taken at 12% year after year 2. WACC has been forecasted at 30% 3. The sales have been projecte…

Valencia Nutrition Limited (Earlier Known As Valencia Nutrition Private Limited), Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 7(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 473/BANG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Oct 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George George K.And Shri B.R. Baskaran

For Appellant: Shri B.R. Sudheendra, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Manjeet Singh, D.R
Section 56(2)(viib)

…the basis has to be DCF method and he cannot change the method of valuation which has been opted by the ITA No.473&474/Bang/2020 M/s. Valencia Nutrition Limited, Bangalore Page 12 of 14 Assessee. The decision of ITAT, Delhi in the case of Agro Portfolio Ltd. 171 ITD 74 has also been considered by the ITAT, Bangalore in the case of VBHC Value Homes Pvt.Ltd.(supra). 20. The gist of the findings of the Assessing Officer and the ld. CIT(A) on the alleged discrepancies in the valuation report is as under: 1. Growth rate is taken at 12% year after year 2. WACC has been forecasted at 30% 3. The sales have been projecte…

M/S. Taaq Music Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 7(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 161/BANG/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Sept 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B R Baskaranassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Balram R. Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 10Section 14Section 21Section 56(2)(viib)

…by calling a determination from an independent valuer to confront the Assessee but the basis has to be DCF method and he cannot change the method of valuation which has been opted by the Assessee. The decision of ITAT, Delhi in the case of Agro Portfolio Ltd. 171 ITD 74 has also been considered by the ITAT, Bangalore in the case of VBHC Value Homes Pvt. Ltd.(supra). Page 13 of 14 12. In view of the above legal position, we are of view that the issue with regard to valuation has to be decided afresh by the AO on the lines indicated in the decision of ITAT, Bangalore in the case of VBHC Value Homes Pvt. Ltd., Vs I…

M/S I-Exceed Technology Solutions Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-3(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1181/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Aug 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevanand Shri B.R. Baskaran, Accoutant Member Assessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. R. Premi, D.R
Section 56(2)(viib)

…by calling a determination from an independent valuer to confront the Assessee but the basis has to be DCF method and he cannot change the method of valuation which has been opted by the Assessee. The decision of ITAT, Delhi in the case of Agro Portfolio Ltd. 171 ITD 74 has also been considered by the ITAT, Bangalore in the case of VBHC Value Homes Pvt.Ltd.(supra). 20. The gist of the findings of the Assessing Officer and the ld. CIT(A) on the alleged discrepancies in the valuation report is as under: 1. Growth rate is taken at 12% year after year 2. WACC has been forecasted at 30% 3. The sales have been projecte…

M/S Flutura Business Solutions Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward-3(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 3404/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jun 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri B.R.Baskaranita No.3404(Bang)/2018 (Assessment Year : 2013-14) M/S Flutura Business Solutions Pvt.Ltd., G-1, Gurupriya Seventh Hill, Bg 12/2/13, 4Th Cross, Iti Hbcs Layout, Bsk 3Rd Stage, Bengaluru-560 004 Pan No.Aabcf9125B Appellant Vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1)(1), Room No.209, 2Nd Floor, Bmtc Building, Koramanagala, Bangalore Respondent Appellant By : Shri C.Ramesh, Ca Revenue By : Shri Priyadharshini Misra, Addl.Cit

For Appellant: Shri C.Ramesh, CAFor Respondent: Shri Priyadharshini Misra, Addl.CIT
Section 56(2)(viib)

…by calling a determination from an independent valuer to confront the Assessee but the basis has to be DCF method and he cannot change the method of valuation which has been opted by the Assessee. The decision of ITAT, Delhi in the case of Agro Portfolio Ltd. 171 ITD 74 has also been considered by the ITAT, Bangalore in the case of VBHC Value Homes Pvt.Ltd.(supra). 20. The gist of the findings of the Assessing Officer and the ld. CIT(A) on the alleged discrepancies in the valuation report is as under: 1. Growth rate is taken at 12% year after year 2. WACC has been forecasted at 30% 3. The sales have been projec…

M/S. Vbhc Value Homes Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Ward- 7(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2016-17 is partly allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 37/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Jun 2020AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillaiappeal No. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year M/S. Vbhc Value Homes Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax Officer, 2015-16 74-75 Millers Road, Vasanthnagar, Ward – 7(1)(3), Bengaluru – 560 052. Bengaluru. Pan : Aaccv 7868 G The Assistant Commissioner 2016-17 -Do- Of Income Tax, Ward – 7(1)(2), Bengaluru. S.P. No. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year 29/Bang/2020 M/S. Vbhc Value Homes Income Tax Officer, 2015-16 Pvt. Ltd., Ward – 7(1)(3), (In Ita No.2541/Bang/2019) Pan : Aaccv 7868 G Bengaluru. 59/Bang/2020 -Do- The Assistant Commissioner 2016-17 Of Income Tax, (In Ita No. 37/Bang/2020) Ward – 7(1)(2), Bengaluru. Assessee/S.P. By : Shri. S. Ramasubramanian, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Neera Malhotra, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru Date Of Hearing : 10/06/2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 12/06/2020 O R D E R Per A. K. Garodia

For Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 14ASection 56(2)

…e of Sunrise Academy of Medical Specialities (India) (P.) Ltd., Vs. ITO as reported in 409 ITR 109 (Kerala). She also placed reliance on the Tribunal order of Delhi Bench of the Tribunal rendered in the case of Agro Portfolio Pvt. Ltd., Vs. ITO as reported in 171 ITD 74. In the rejoinder, it was submitted by learned AR of the assessee that in the case of Innoviti Payment Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO (supra), the Tribunal has followed the judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court rendered in the case of Vodafone M-Pesa Ltd. Vs. Pr. CIT as reported in 256 Taxmann 240 and in this case, the Tribunal duly considered the Tr…

M/S. Vbhc Value Homes Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 7(1)(3), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2016-17 is partly allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 2541/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Jun 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillaiappeal No. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year M/S. Vbhc Value Homes Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax Officer, 2015-16 74-75 Millers Road, Vasanthnagar, Ward – 7(1)(3), Bengaluru – 560 052. Bengaluru. Pan : Aaccv 7868 G The Assistant Commissioner 2016-17 -Do- Of Income Tax, Ward – 7(1)(2), Bengaluru. S.P. No. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year 29/Bang/2020 M/S. Vbhc Value Homes Income Tax Officer, 2015-16 Pvt. Ltd., Ward – 7(1)(3), (In Ita No.2541/Bang/2019) Pan : Aaccv 7868 G Bengaluru. 59/Bang/2020 -Do- The Assistant Commissioner 2016-17 Of Income Tax, (In Ita No. 37/Bang/2020) Ward – 7(1)(2), Bengaluru. Assessee/S.P. By : Shri. S. Ramasubramanian, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Neera Malhotra, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru Date Of Hearing : 10/06/2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 12/06/2020 O R D E R Per A. K. Garodia

For Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 14ASection 56(2)

…e of Sunrise Academy of Medical Specialities (India) (P.) Ltd., Vs. ITO as reported in 409 ITR 109 (Kerala). She also placed reliance on the Tribunal order of Delhi Bench of the Tribunal rendered in the case of Agro Portfolio Pvt. Ltd., Vs. ITO as reported in 171 ITD 74. In the rejoinder, it was submitted by learned AR of the assessee that in the case of Innoviti Payment Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO (supra), the Tribunal has followed the judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court rendered in the case of Vodafone M-Pesa Ltd. Vs. Pr. CIT as reported in 256 Taxmann 240 and in this case, the Tribunal duly considered the Tr…