Sudhir Menon HUF v. ACIT

45 Taxmann.com 176Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2014#5628 most cited

What is Sudhir Menon HUF v. ACIT authority for?

Section 56(2)(vii)(c) does not apply to additional shares allotted pro rata to existing shareholders, as there is no scope for any property being received in such a situation.

21

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Sudhir Menon HUF v. ACIT · section 56(2)(vii)(c) · additional shares · pro rata allotment · existing shareholders · no property received · ITAT Mumbai

Also reported as

148 ITD 260

Sections most often in play

Section 56(2)(viia)Section 143(3)Section 45Section 48Section 49(4)Section 50DSection 54FSection 56(2)(vii)(c)

Issues it is cited on

section 56(2)(vii)(c)section 56(2)(viia)section 47section 49nav methodsection 56(2)(vii)purposive interpretationsection 52dcf methodsection 56(2)(viib)valuation of sharessection 56(2)

Judgments citing Sudhir Menon HUF v. ACIT

DCIT, Bangalore vs. Dr. Rajan Pai, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1290/BANG/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Apr 2016AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri. Abraham P. George & Shri. George George Ki.T.A No.1290/Bang/2015 (Assessment Year : 2012-13) Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Central Circle -2(2), Bengaluru .. Appellant V. Dr. Rajan Pai, Block No.1B, Jakkur Plantation Village, Yelahanka Main Road, Bengaluru .. Respondent Pan : Agbpp2795G Assessee By : Shri. Sajjan Kumar Tulsiyan, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. Sanjay Kumar, Cit -Iii Heard On : 12.04.2016 Pronounced On : 29.04.2016 O R D E R Per Abraham P. George:

For Appellant: Shri. Sajjan Kumar Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Sanjay Kumar, CIT -III
Section 115RSection 115R(2)Section 56Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(vii)

…h Circular No.6/2016, dt.11.02.2014 of CBDT was issued in relation to Section 115R(2) of the Act, analogy therein would apply here also. Reliance was also placed on a decision of the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Sudhir Menon HUF v. ACIT [(2014) 148 ITD 260]. ITA.1290/Bang/2015 Page - 4 04. Ld.CIT (A), after going through the submissions of the assessee was of the opinion that assessee had to succeed. According to him, the issue whether any income should be attributed for bonus shares issued to a beneficiary was considered by the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Sudhir Menon HUF (Supra)…