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#3420 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 366,369 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

M/S. Innaccel Technologies Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 3(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 146/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Dec 2020AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Shri Siddana Biradar, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. R.Premi, D.R

Section 56(2)(viib)

…ITA No.146/Bang/2020 M/s. Innaccel Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru 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. Innaccel Technologies Private Ltd. 5th Floor, Municipal No.4, Anand Towers, Raja Ram Mohan Roy Road, ACIT Ward No.77, Sampangiramnagar, Vs. Circle-3(1)(1) Bengaluru, Karanataka 560 025 Bengaluru PAN NO : AADCI0623H APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Siddana Biradar, A.R. Respondent by : Smt. R.Premi, D.R. Date of Hearing : 16.12.2020 Date of Pronouncement :…

Tsi Yatra Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. Addl. CIT, Range-25, New Delhi

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

ITA 1068/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Dec 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Rana, Sr.D.R

Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 56(2)(viib)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “G” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND Dr. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.1068/DEL/2019 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 TSI Yatra Pvt. Ltd., vs. ACIT, United Cyber Park, Range-25, Ist Floor, Sector-39, New Delhi. Gurgaon, Haryana. TAN/PAN: AABCT7696P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Tarandeep Singh, Adv. Respondent by: Shri S.S. Rana, Sr.D.R. Date of hearing: 20 11 2020 Date of pronouncement: 14 12 2020 O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA, JM The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the assessee aggrieved against impugned order, dated…

M/S. Saahas Waste Management Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 6(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 1881/BANG/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Dec 2020AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Shri H.V. Goutham, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, D.R

Section 56(2)(viib)

…ITA No.1881/Bang/2019 M/s. Saahas Waste Management (P) Ltd., Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B’’BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K., JUDICIAL MEMBERAND SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AssessmentYear:2016-17 M/s. Saahas Waste Management (P) Ltd. No.21, 5th ‘C’ Cross, 16th Main Deputy Commissioner of BTM 2nd Stage Vs. Income-tax Bangalore-560 076 Circle-6(1)(1) Bangalore PAN NO : AATCS5284J APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri H.V. Goutham, A.R. Respondent by : Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, D.R. Date of Hearing : 03.11.2020 Date of Pronouncement : 01.12.2020 O R D E R PER B.R.…

M/S. Canvera Digital Technologies Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 2(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 316/BANG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Nov 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri A.K Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: Smt. Tanmayee Rajkumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, JCIT (DR)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271Section 56(2)(viib)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI A.K GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2015-16 Canvera Digital Technologies Vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Pvt. Ltd., Income-tax, No.36/5, Ground Floor, Circle-2(1)(1), 27th Main Road, HSR Layout, Bengaluru. Somasundara Palya, Haralukunte Village, Bengaluru-560 102. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Smt. Tanmayee Rajkumar, Advocate Respondent by : Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, JCIT (DR) Date of hearing : 29.10.2020 Date of Pronouncement : 02.11.2020 O R D E R PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Pr…

M/S. Gs E-Commerce Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 3(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 335/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Oct 2020AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Gse Commerce Private Ltd. No.41, Medsoft Building Tata Silk Farm Acit Kankapura Main Road Vs. Circle-3(1)(2) Basavangudi Bangalore Bangalore-560 004 Pan No : Aafcg0578B Appellant Respondent S.P. No.91/Bang/2020 (Arising Out Of Ita No.335/Bang/2020) Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Gse Commerce Private Ltd. Acit Circle-3(1)(2) Vs. Bangalore-560 004 Bangalore Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Jayesh Gupta, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. R. Premi, D.R

Section 56(2)(viib)

…ITA No.335/Bang/2020 M/s. GSE Commerce Private Ltd., Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI B. R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/s. GSE Commerce Private Ltd. No.41, Medsoft Building Tata Silk Farm ACIT Kankapura Main Road Vs. Circle-3(1)(2) Basavangudi Bangalore Bangalore-560 004 PAN NO : AAFCG0578B APPELLANT RESPONDENT S.P. No.91/Bang/2020 (Arising out of ITA No.335/Bang/2020) Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/s. GSE Commerce Private Ltd. ACIT Circle-3(1)(2) Vs. Bangalore-560 004 Bangalore APPELLANT RESPONDENT…

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)

…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 learne…

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)

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)

…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 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: Page 8 of 14 "11. As per various tribunal orders cite…

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)

…ated 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: M/s. I-Exceed Technology Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru Page 5 of 12 “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 a…

M/S Antariksh Softtech Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward-1(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes in the terms indicated above

ITA 83/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Jul 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2015-16 M/S. Antariksh Softtech Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Income Tax Officer, #11/1, Khr House, Palace Road, Ward – 1(1)(2), Bengaluru – 560 017. Bengaluru. Pan : Aahca 1836 G Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Smt. Prathibha, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. Tshering Ongela, Addl.Cit (Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru Date Of Hearing : 25.06.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 09.07.2020 O R D E R Per A. K. Garodia, Am:

For Appellant: Smt. Prathibha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Tshering Ongela, Addl.CIT (DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 2Section 234BSection 4Section 56Section 56(2)

…resent year, then the whole issue should be examined and decided by the AO afresh in the light various judicial pronouncements available by now such as (i) the tribunal order rendered in the case of Innoviti Payment Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Vs. ITO as reported in 175 ITD 10 (Bang.), (ii) the tribunal order rendered in the case of M/s. VBHC Value Homes Pvt. Ltd., Vs. ACIT in ITA No. 2541/Bang/2019 dated 12.06.2020, (iii) the judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court rendered in the case of Vodafone M-Pesa Ltd. vs. PCIT as reported in 164 DTR 257. In these judicial pronouncements, it was held that AO cannot change the meth…

M/S. Signure Technologies Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 6(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1670/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Jul 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2015-16 M/S. Signure Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of No.18, 2Nd Floor, 80 Feet Road, Income-Tax, Koramangala 4Th Block, Circle – 6(1)(1), Bengaluru – 560 034. Bengaluru. Pan : Aalcs 4781 L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. V. Srinivasan, Advocate Revenue By : Smt. R. Premi, Jcit (Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru Date Of Hearing : 02.07.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 03.07.2020 O R D E R Per A. K. Garodia, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee & The Same Is Directed Against The Order Of Learned Cit(A)-1, Bhubaneswar, Dated 10.05.2019 For Assessment Year 2015-16. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are As Under:

For Appellant: Shri. V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R. Premi, JCIT (DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 234ASection 56Section 62

…nd he submitted a copy of this Tribunal order and pointed out that in para 9 of this Tribunal order, the Tribunal has reproduced the relevant portion of another Tribunal order rendered in the case of Innoviti Payment Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO as reported in 175 ITD 10 (Bang.). He further pointed out that in that earlier order rendered 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. PCIT as reported in 164 DTR 257 and it was held that as per the judgment of Hon’ble Bombay Hig…

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)

…er 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…

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)

…was recommended at Rs.527/- per share as per DCF method but the AO adopted FMV method and made this addition. In this regard, reliance was placed by him on the Tribunal order rendered in the case of Innoviti Payment Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Vs. ITO as reported in 175 ITD 10 (Bang.). He pointed out that paras 11 to 14 of this Tribunal order available on pages 83-84 of the paper book are relevant as per which the matter was restored back to the file of AO with certain directions. He submitted that in the present case also, the matter may be restored back to the file of AO with similar directions after admitting the add…

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

For Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 14ASection 56(2)

M/S Ibs Fintech India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-3(1)(4), Bangalore

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

ITA 2779/BANG/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 May 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2015-16 M/S. Ibs Fintech India Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax Officer, No.222/14, Iii Floor, 5Th Main, Ward – 3(1)(4), Bellary Road, Vs. Bengaluru. Sadashivanagar, Bengaluru – 560 080. Pan : Aabci 6829 H Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Krishna Upadhya, Ca Revenue By : Shri. A. Ramesh Kumar, Jcit (Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru Date Of Hearing : 03.03.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.05.2020 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. Krishna Upadhya, CAFor Respondent: Shri. A. Ramesh Kumar, JCIT (DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 251Section 56(2)(viib)Section 68

…r enhancement, specific opportunity of hearing should be provided to the appellant.” 4. Regarding Ground No.2, learned AR of the assessee placed reliance on the Tribunal order rendered in the case of Innoviti Payment Solutions (P) Ltd., Vs. ITO as reported in 175 ITD 10 (Bangalore – Trib.) and submitted that as per para No.12 of this Tribunal order, the Tribunal has restored the matter back to the file of AO for a fresh decision by following the judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court rendered in the case of Vodafone M-Pesa Ltd., Vs. Pr.CIT as reported in 256 Taxman 240. He submitted that in the present case also,…