Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Innoviti Payment Solutions Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 56(2)(viib), Section 143(3), Section 11UA(2)(b), Section 133(6), Section 142(1), Section 143(2).

Innoviti Payment Solutions Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO

Q: How many judgments cite Innoviti Payment Solutions Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO?

35 judgments on BharatTax cite Innoviti Payment Solutions Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO (102 Taxmann.com 59), spanning 2020 to 2026.

102 Taxmann.com 59Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2019#3425 most cited

What is Innoviti Payment Solutions Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO authority for?

The Assessing Officer (AO) cannot discard the Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) method for share valuation if the assessee opts for it as per Rule 11UA(2). The AO must record reasons for not accepting the assessee's valuation report and obtain a fresh report before proceeding with their own valuation, but cannot change the method chosen by the assessee.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2020 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Innoviti Payment Solutions Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO · Rule 11UA(2) · DCF method · NAV method · valuation of shares · AO cannot discard DCF method · assessee opted for DCF method · rejection of valuation report

Also reported as

175 ITD 10

Sections most often in play

Section 56(2)(viib)Section 143(3)Section 11UA(2)(b)Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144B Section 144C(13)

Issues it is cited on

nav method dcf method valuation of shares section 56(2)(viib)commercial rights closely held company section 56(2)going concern intangible assets fair market value date of transfer section 56

Judgments citing Innoviti Payment Solutions Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO

ASCENTECH ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 1686/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad06 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita.No.1686/Hyd/2025

For Appellant: MS Sree Lekha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri Mathivanan S A, Sr. AR

Section 56(2)(vii)Section 56(2)(viib)

…9 dated 25.01.2024; (vii) Order of ITAT, Hyderabad in the case of JCIT vs. M/s. MLR Auto Limited ITA.No.115/Hyd./2021 dated 28.12.2023; (viii) Order of ITAT, Bangalore in the case of Innoviti Payment Solutions (P.) Ltd. vs. ITO, Ward-3(1)(1), Bengaluru [2019] 175 ITD 10 (Bangalore-Trib.); (ix) Order of ITAT, Delhi in the case of Cinestaan Entertainment (P.) Ltd. vs. ITO, Ward-6(2), New Delhi [2019] 106 taxmann.com 300 (Delhi-Trib.); (x) Order of ITAT, Jaipur in the case of Rameshwaram Strong Glass (P.) Ltd. vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Ajmer [2018] 96 taxmann.com 542 (Jaipur-Trib.); 4. On the other hand, the learned DR ha…

SILLS KARINGATTIL JOSE,NEDUMKANDOM vs. ITO WARD 2, THODUPUZHA

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 132/COCH/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singhsils Karingattil Jose Income Tax Officer Np 3/406, Karingattil Ward - 2, House, Munnar Road Thodupuzha Vs. Nedumkandom P.O. [Pan: Afopj8789C] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri P. M. Veeramani, CAFor Respondent: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R

Section 2(47)Section 2(47)(V)Section 250Section 50CSection 53ASection 56(2)(vii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member & Shri Amarjit Singh, Accountant Member Sils Karingattil Jose Income Tax Officer NP 3/406, Karingattil Ward - 2, House, Munnar Road Thodupuzha vs. Nedumkandom P.O. [PAN: AFOPJ8789C] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri P. M. Veeramani, CA Respondent by: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing: 22.08.2024 Date of Pronouncement: 19.11.2024 O R D E R Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member: This assessee’s appeal for A.Y. 2016-17 arises against the CIT(A)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delh…

DHOLA INFRA PROJECTS LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS NAVAYUGA DHOLA INFRA PROJECTS LIMITED),MUMBAI vs. ACIT., CIRCLE-16(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 800/HYD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Bleassessment Year – 2016-17 Dhola Infra Projects Limited Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Tax (Formerly Known As Navayuga Circle-16(1) Dhola Infra Projects Limited Hyderabad Mumbai Pan : Aadcn3696B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Paras S.Savla, Ld.Ar (Through Virtual Hearing) Revenue By: Shri U Mini Chandran, Ld.Dr Date Of Hearing: 17.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 17.10.2024

For Appellant: Shri Paras S.Savla, Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri U Mini Chandran, Ld.DR

Section 234DSection 244ASection 56(2)(viib)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “SMC” , HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year – 2016-17 Dhola Infra Projects Limited Vs. Asst.Commissioner of Tax (Formerly Known as Navayuga Circle-16(1) Dhola Infra Projects Limited Hyderabad Mumbai PAN : AADCN3696B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Paras S.Savla, Ld.AR (Through Virtual Hearing) Revenue by: Shri U Mini Chandran, Ld.DR Date of hearing: 17.10.2024 Date of pronouncement: 17.10.2024 O R D E R PER LALIET KUMAR, J.M. This appeal is filed by the assessee, feeling…

PATHFINDER PUBLISHING PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CIRCLE -16(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 39/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Ms. TH Vijaya Lakshmi, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 56(2)(viib)

…आआआआ आआआआआआ आआआआआआ, आआआआआआआआ आआआ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘A’ Bench, Hyderabad BEFORE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अपी.सं /ITA No.39/Hyd/2024 & SA 9/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2017-18) M/s. Pathfinder Publishing Pvt. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Vs. Circle-16(2), Hyderabad. Ltd., Hyderabad. PAN : AAECP6764F (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee by: Shri S.K. Gupta, Advocate रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue by:: Ms. TH Vijaya Lakshmi, CIT-DR सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date of hearing: 11/07/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement…

THE JCIT (OSD), CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. MAGNET BUILDTECH P. LTD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 489/AHD/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.489/Ahd/2020 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2016-17 The Jcit (Osd) M/S. Magnet Buildtech Pvt.Ltd. Circle-2(1)(1) बनाम/ 906-907, Indraprasth Corporate Ahmedabad Opp. Venus Atlantis V/S. Anand Nagar Road Ahmedabad – 380 015 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaicm 4158 J (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) ("" यथ"/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vartik Chokshi & Shri Dhrunal Bhatt, Ars Revenue By : Shri Kamlesh Makwana, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 23/07/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 25/07/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 09/07/2020 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-32, New Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)” In Short] Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Dated 11/12/2018 Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act") Relevant To The Assessment Year (Ay) 2016-17. The Jcit (Osd) Vs. M/S.Magnet Buildtech Pvt.Ltd. Asst. Year : 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Vartik Chokshi &For Respondent: Shri Kamlesh Makwana, CIT-DR

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 56(2)(viib)

…n accordance with the prescribed provisions of law. I have considered the decision cited by the AR the view taken by the Ld CIT(A) has been supported by various ITATs. The ITAT, Bangalore Bench in the case of Innovit Payment Solutions Pvt. Ltd., v. ITO [2019] 102 Taxmann.com 59 has held as follows: “14. In nutshell, our conclusions are as under:- (1) The AO can scrutinize the valuation report and the if the AO is not satisfied with the explanation of the assessee, he has to record the reasons and basis for not accepting the valuation report submitted by the assessee and only thereafter, he can go for own valuat…

M/S. PISCES ESERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE 3(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 310/BANG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan Kassessment Years : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri KR Pradeep & Ms. Girija G.P, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri Vilas Shinde, CIT (DR)

Section 56(2)(viib)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Years : 2018-19 Pisces EServices Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Prestige Startech, Block C, Income Tax, Circle-3(1)(1), Koramangala, Bangalore. Hosur Road, . Bangalore-560 095. PAN – AAGCP 5410 J APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri KR Pradeep & Ms. Girija G.P, Advocates Revenue by : Shri Vilas Shinde, CIT (DR) Date of hearing : 29.05.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 25.07.2024 O R D E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This is an appeal fil…

ITO WARD - 24(1), NEW DELHI vs. SOLITAIRE BTN SOLAR PVT LIMITED, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1416/DEL/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Gurpreet Singh, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 56(2)(viib)

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “G” DELHI BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.1416/DEL/2020 Assessment Year 2016-17 ITO, Ward-24(1) Solitaire BTN Solar Pvt. Limited 616A, 16A, 6th Floor, Devika New Delhi Vs. Tower, Nehru Place New Delhi TAN/PAN: AASCS0567R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Gaurav Jain, Advocate Shri Vijay Singh, Chartered Accountant Respondent by: Shri Gurpreet Singh, Sr.DR Date of hearing: 16 05 2024 Date of pronouncement: 12 06 2024 O R D E R PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA-AM: The captioned appeal has been file…

M/S. FINWIZARD TECHNOLOGY PVT LTD., ,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 1(2)(1) , BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 15/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Sri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V. Parithivel, D.R

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 56(2)(viib)Section 68

…cision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Vodafone M-Pesa Ltd Vs Pr. CIT 164 DTR 257 and decision of the Finwizard Technology Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page 7 of 13 ITAT, Bangalore Bench in the case of Innovit Payment Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Vs ITO(2019) 102 Taxmann.com 59 held as follows: “9. We have considered the rival submissions. First of all, we reproduce paras 11 to 14 from the Tribunal order cited by learned AR of the assessee having been rendered in the case of Innoviti Payment Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Vs. ITO (supra). These paras are as follows: "11. As per various tribunal orders cited by the learned…

ITO WARD - 23(1), NEW DELHI vs. SHARP EYE BROADCASTING PVT LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1105/DEL/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey- & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia-

For Appellant: Shri Arun Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anuj Garg, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 56(2)(viib)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “G” DELHI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY-VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA-ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.1105/DEL/2020 Assessment Year 2016-17 ITO Sharp Eye Broadcasting Pvt. Ward-23(1), Vs. Ltd. New Delhi. 38, Jhansi Road Jhandewalan New Delhi-110055 TAN/PAN: AAOCS8090D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Arun Kumar, Adv. Respondent by: Shri Anuj Garg, Sr.DR Date of hearing: 24 08 2023 Date of pronouncement: 20 11 2023 O R D E R PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA-A.M. : The captioned appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order of the Commissioner of In…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-16(1), HYDERABAD vs. NCL GREEN HABITATS PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1790/HYD/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Sri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Sri M. Naveen Kumar

Section 143(2)Section 56(2)(viib)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘B’ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda, Accountant Member AND Shri Laliet Kumar, Judicial Member ITA.No.1790/Hyd/2019 Assessment Year: 2016-17 The Deputy Commissioner Vs. M/s. NCL Green Habitats of Income Tax, Private Limited, Circle 16(1), Plot No.1, Bindu Hyderabad. Elegance, Ganga Enclave, Petbasheerabad, Quthubdullahpur, Hyderabad. Telangana – 500067. PAN : AACCK2576N. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Sri S. Rama Rao Revenue by: Sri M. Naveen Kumar Date of hearing: 26.04.2023 Date of pronouncement: 15.05.2023 O R D E R Per Shri Laliet Kumar, J.…

M/S. WATERLINE HOTELS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 7(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 388/BANG/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Sept 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2013-14 Waterline Hotels Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner 10Th Floor, Gamma Block, Of Income Tax, Sigma Soft Tech Park No.07, Circle 7(1)(2), Airport Varthur Road, Bangalore. Whitefield, Bangalore – 560 066. Pan: Aaacw 8059N Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Pranav Krishna, Advocate Respondent By : Shri V S Chakrapani, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 29.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.09.2022 O R D E R Per Padmavathy S.This Appeal By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of The Cit(Appeals)-7, Bengaluru Dated 27.3.2019 For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Assessee Has Raised 18 Grounds Pertaining To The Following Issues:- Page 2 Of 20

For Appellant: Shri Pranav Krishna, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri V S Chakrapani, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 143(2)Section 271Section 40Section 56(2)(viib)

…ang/2019 order dated 12-06-2020, after relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Vodafone MPesa Ltd Vs Pr.CIT 164 DTR 257 and decision of the ITAT, Bangalore Bench in the case of Innoviti Payment Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Vs ITO(2019) 102 Taxmann.com 59 held as follows:- “9. We have considered the rival submissions. First of all, we reproduce paras 11 to 14 from the Tribunal order cited by learned AR of the assessee having been rendered in the case of Innoviti Payment Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Vs. ITO (supra). These paras are as follows: "11. As per various tribunal orders cited by the learne…

PRIVILEGE INDUSTRIES LTD.,MUMBAI vs. PR. CIT - 14, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal is dismissed

ITA 3317/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax– M/S Privilege Industries Ltd. 14 3Rd Floor, Dheeraj Arma, Anant Room No. 415, Vs. Kanekar Marg, 4Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400 051 Maharshi Karve Road, Mumbai-400 020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaecs6532N

For Appellant: Mr. Nimesh Thar, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Sanjay V. Deshmukh, DR

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 56(2)(viib)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax– M/s Privilege Industries Ltd. 14 3rd Floor, Dheeraj Arma, Anant Room no. 415, Vs. Kanekar Marg, 4th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400 051 Maharshi Karve Road, Mumbai-400 020 (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AAECS6532N Assessee by : Mr. Nimesh Thar, AR Revenue by : Mr. Sanjay V. Deshmukh, DR 22.06.2022 Date of hearing: Date of pronouncement : 26.07.2022 O R D E R Per PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM: 01. This appeal is filed by the assessee against the orde…

M/S. TE CONNECTIVITY SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 300/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 May 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A No.300/Bang/2021 Assessment Year : 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Sriram Sheshadri & Ms. Amulya K., CAsFor Respondent: Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(TP)A No.300/Bang/2021 Assessment year : 2016-17 TE Connectivity Services Vs. The Assessing Officer, India Private Ltd., National Faceless 59/2, 1st Floor, Gurudas Heritage, Assessment Centre, Block-b, 100 Feet Ring Road, Delhi. Banashankari 2nd Stage, Bangalore – 560 070. PAN: AAFCT 3474R APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Sriram Sheshadri & Ms. Amulya K., CAs Respondent by : Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 15.03.2022 Dat…

M/S. FORTIGO NETWORK LOGISTICS PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 3(1)(1), BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2174/BANG/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Feb 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Sri G.S. Prashanth, A.RFor Respondent: Sri M.K. Biju, D.R

Section 56(2)(viib)Section 68

…r dated 12-06-2020. The Tribunal, after relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Vodafone M-Pesa Ltd Vs Pr.CIT 164 DTR 257 and decision of the ITAT, Bangalore Bench in the case of Innovit Payment Solutions Pvt.Ltd., Vs ITO(2019) 102 Taxmann.com 59. held as follows: “9. We have considered the rival submissions. First of all, we reproduce paras 11 to 14 from the Tribunal order cited by learned AR of the assessee having been rendered in the case of Innoviti Payment Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Vs. ITO (supra). These paras are as follows: "11. As per various tribunal orders cited by the learned…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 1(1)(3), BANGALORE vs. M/S. BANGALORE PAINTS LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is treated as allowed and the cross objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 9/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Nov 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri B.R. Baskaranassessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Smt. Priyadarshini Besaganni, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Narendra Kumar Jain, A.R

Section 56(2)(viib)

…ITA No.9/Bang/2020 & CO 11/Bang/2020 M/s. Bangalore Paints Pvt. Ltd, Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/s. Bangalore Paints Ltd. ITO Ward-1(1)(3) No.20, 3rd Floor, 6th Cross, 8th Main Bangalore Vs. Vasanthnagar Bengaluru-560052 PAN NO : AAACB6085B APPELLANT RESPONDENT C.O. No.11/Bang/2020 (Arising out of ITA No.9/Bang/2020) Assessment Year : 2016-17 M/s. Bangalore Paints Ltd. No.20, 3rd Floor, 6th Cross, 8th Main ITO Ward-1(1)(3) Vs. Vasanthnagar Bangalore Beng…

SLX LOGISTICS PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE- 6(1)(1), BENGALURU

In the result appeal filed by assessee allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1957/BANG/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Oct 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2016-17 M/S. Slx Logistics Pvt. Ltd., 107, Salarpuria Cambridge The Deputy Residency, Commissioner Of 32/2, 1St Cross, Income Tax, Someshwara Layout, Circle 6(1)(1), Ulsoor, Vs. Bangalore. Bengaluru – 560 068. Pan: Aavcs0482N Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Navaneeth N Kini, Ca Revenue By : Shri K. Sankarganesh, Jcit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 13-09-2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 21-10-2021 Order Per Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Navaneeth N Kini, CAFor Respondent: Shri K. Sankarganesh, JCIT (DR)

Section 142Section 56(2)(viib)

…g/2019 order dated 12-06-2020, after relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Vodafone M- Pesa Ltd Vs Pr.CIT 164 DTR 257 and decision of the ITAT, Bangalore Bench in the case of Innoviti Payment Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Vs ITO(2019) 102 Taxmann.com 59 held as follows:- "9. We have considered the rival submissions. First of all, we reproduce paras 11 to 14 from the Tribunal order cited by learned AR of the assessee having been rendered in the case of Innoviti Payment Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Vs. ITO (supra). These paras are as follows: "11. As per various tribunal orders cited by the learned…

3P TECHNOLOGIES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 7(1)(4), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 238/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Aug 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K.And Shri B.R. Baskaranassessment Year:2016-17

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Kannan Narayanan, D.R

Section 11USection 56(2)(viib)

MESERS HIM AGRI FESH PVT. LTD,JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFICER WARD-1(2), JALANDHAR

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 224/ASR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Laliet Kumar & Dr. M. L. Meenai.T.A. No. 224/Asr/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-15

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. BEFORE SH. LALIET KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 224/Asr/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/s Him Agri Fesh Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Income Tax Officer, 518, J.P. Nagar, Jalandhar Ward-1(2), Jalandhar [PAN: AACCH 8112M] (Appellant) (Respendent) Appellant by Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, Adv. Respondent by Smt. Ratinder Kaur, D. R. Date of Hearing 06.07.2021 Date of Pronouncement 07.07.2021 ORDER Per Laliet Kumar, J.M. This appeal of the assessee is directed against the order dated 22.02.2018 passed by the Commissioner of Inc…

M/S. TOWN ESSENTIAL PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)- 7, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 139/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jun 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B R Baskaranassessment Year : 2016-17 M/S. Town Essential Private Limited, Vs. The Commissioner Of Income Tax 54/1, Industrial Suburb, (Appeals)-7, Yeshwanthpur, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 022. Pan : Aabct 4200 D Appellant Respondent Appellant By : None (Adjournment Request Refused) Respondent By : Shri Kannan Narayanan, Jt.Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 24.06.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.06.2021 O R D E R Per N.V. Vasudevanthis Appeal By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)–7, Bangalore, Dated 29.11.2019 In Relation To Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. The Only Issue Involved In The Appeal Is As To Whether The Revenue Authorities Were Justified In Invoking Provisions Of Section 56(2)(Viib) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) & Bringing To Tax The Difference Between The Fair Market Value & The Issue Price Of Shares At A Premium As Income Of The Assessee. Section 21 Clause (B) Of Finance Act, 2012 Introduced Sec.56(2)(Viib) Of The Act With Effect From The 1St Day Of April, 2013 & The Said Provisions Reads Thus:-

For Appellant: None (Adjournment request refused)For Respondent: Shri Kannan Narayanan, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 10Section 14Section 21Section 56(2)(viib)

…g/2019 order dated 12-06-2020, after relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Vodafone M- Pesa Ltd Vs Pr.CIT 164 DTR 257 and decision of the ITAT, Bangalore Bench in the case of Innoviti Payment Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Vs ITO(2019) 102 Taxmann.com 59 held as follows:- “9. We have considered the rival submissions. First of all, we reproduce paras 11 to 14 from the Tribunal order cited by learned AR of the assessee having been rendered in the case of Innoviti Payment Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Vs. ITO (supra). These paras are as follows: "11. As per various tribunal orders cited by the learn…

M/S. UKN HOSPITALITY PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 7(1)(2), BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2170/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jun 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B. R. Baskaranassessment Year : 2013-14 M/S. Ukn Hospitality Private Limited, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 10Th Floor, Gamma Block, Sigma Soft Tech Ward – 7(1)(2), Park, No.7, Airport Varthur Road, Bengaluru. Whitefield Main Road, Bengaluru – 560 066. Pan : Aaacu 8470 B Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri S. V. Ravishankar Advocate Respondent By : Shri Kannan Narayanan, Jt.Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 24.06.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.06.2021 O R D E R Per N.V. Vasudevanthis Appeal By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)–10, Bangalore, Dated 8.3.2019 In Relation To Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. There Is A Delay Of About 132 Days In Filing This Appeal By The Assessee. The Reasons For The Delay Is Owing To The Fact That Mr.K.Ravindran, The Group Cfo & Director Who Was Handling The Matter Did Not Bring To The Notice Of The Group Chairman About The Impugned Order. Mr.K.Ravindran Was Made To Resign As Director Due To Various Issues & He Stopped Attending Office Since April, 2019. The Chartered Account Who Appeared Before Cit(A) In A Meeting With The Officials On Page 2 Of 12 30.9.2019 Found That No Action Had Been Taken Against The Impugned Order & Thereafter The Appeal Had Been Filed.

For Appellant: Shri S. V. Ravishankar AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kannan Narayanan, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 10Section 14Section 21Section 56(2)(viib)

…2020, the Tribunal after relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay Page 6 of 12 High Court in the case of Vodafone M-Pesa Ltd Vs Pr.CIT 164 DTR 257 and decision of the ITAT, Bangalore Bench in the case of Innoviti Payment Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Vs ITO(2019) 102 Taxmann.com 59 held as follows:- “9. We have considered the rival submissions. First of all, we reproduce paras 11 to 14 from the Tribunal order cited by learned AR of the assessee having been rendered in the case of Innoviti Payment Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Vs. ITO (supra). These paras are as follows: "11. As per various tribunal orders cited by the learn…

Showing 1–20 of 35 · Page 1 of 2