Vodafone M-Pesa Ltd. v. PCIT

164 DTR 257High Court2018#1655 most cited

What is Vodafone M-Pesa Ltd. v. PCIT authority for?

An assessee has the option to choose either the Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) method or the Net Asset Value (NAV) method for share valuation under Section 56(2)(viib) read with Rule 11UA. The Assessing Officer cannot substitute the chosen method or value without identifying a specific error in the assessee's valuation.

69

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,459 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Vodafone M-Pesa Ltd. v. PCIT · Section 56(2)(viib) · Rule 11UA · share valuation · Fair Market Value · DCF method · NAV method · assessee's option · AO substitution of valuation · valuation of shares income tax · Bombay High Court

Also reported as

92 Taxmann.com 73256 Taxmann 240

Sections most often in play

Section 56(2)(viib)Section 143(3)Section 11UASection 115JBSection 147Section 148Section 35ADSection 35AD(7B)

Issues it is cited on

nav methoddcf methodsection 2(19aa)section 56(2)(viib)section 35advaluation of sharescommercial rightssection 55acommercial substancesection 13(2)intangible assetsslump sale

Judgments citing Vodafone M-Pesa Ltd. v. PCIT

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…

Prl Developers Private Limited, Mumbai City vs. Circle 8(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, ground V of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1031/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Gagan Goyal

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “C”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA 1031/Mum/2024 (Assessment year: 2016-17) PRL Developers Private vs ACIT CIRCLE 8(2)(1), Mumbai Room No.624, 6th Floor, Aayakar Limited, Mumbai City, 8th Floor, Piramal Bhawan, M.K. Road, Churchgate, Tower, Peninsula Corporate Mumbai-400 020 Park, Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400 013 PAN : AAFCP9978E APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by Shri Ronak Doshi a/w Shri Priyank Gala & Shri Bhavya Jain Respondent by Ms. Madhu Malti Ghosh (CIT DR) Date of hearin…

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

…attention of the ITAT, Bangalore Bench in the case of VBHC Value Homes Pvt. Ltd., Vs ITO in ITA No.2541/Bang/2019 order 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 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 h…

DCIT 3(2)92), Mumbai vs. M/S Pnp Martitime Services Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed, while the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 668/MUM/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Dec 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakkar a/wFor Respondent: Shri R.A. Dhyani and Shri H.M. Bhatt
Section 234BSection 250Section 274Section 36(1)(iii)Section 56(2)(viib)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA no.317/Mum./2020 (Assessment Year : 2016-17) PNP Maritime Services Pvt. Ltd. A-5, Ionic, 18, Arthur Bunder Road ……………. Appellant Colaba, Mumbai 400 005 PAN – AABCP8020D v/s Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Circle–3(2)(2), Mumbai ITA no.668/Mum./2020 (Assessment Year : 2016-17) Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Appellant Circle–3(2)(2), Mumbai v/s PNP Maritime Services Pvt. Ltd. A-5, Ionic, 18, Arthur Bunder Road ……………. Respondent Colaba, Mumb…

Pnp Maritime Services Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT 3 (2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed, while the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 317/MUM/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Dec 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakkar a/wFor Respondent: Shri R.A. Dhyani and Shri H.M. Bhatt
Section 234BSection 250Section 274Section 36(1)(iii)Section 56(2)(viib)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA no.317/Mum./2020 (Assessment Year : 2016-17) PNP Maritime Services Pvt. Ltd. A-5, Ionic, 18, Arthur Bunder Road ……………. Appellant Colaba, Mumbai 400 005 PAN – AABCP8020D v/s Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Circle–3(2)(2), Mumbai ITA no.668/Mum./2020 (Assessment Year : 2016-17) Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Appellant Circle–3(2)(2), Mumbai v/s PNP Maritime Services Pvt. Ltd. A-5, Ionic, 18, Arthur Bunder Road ……………. Respondent Colaba, Mumb…

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…

ACIT, Cir- 4(2)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Innovage Fintech Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose in the terms aforesaid

ITA 3068/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Sept 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Om Prakash Kantm/S Innovage Fintech Pvt. Ltd. Acit, Circle-4(2)(1) 4-404, Krishna Residency, Opp Room No. 642, 6Th Floor, Radhakrishna Vidyalaya, Behind Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Sunder Nager, Malad (West), Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400064 Pan No. Aacci3766N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Rutuja N. Pawar &For Respondent: Shri. K. C. Selvamani
Section 14ASection 56(2)(viib)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M/s Innovage Fintech Pvt. Ltd. ACIT, Circle-4(2)(1) 4-404, Krishna Residency, Opp Room No. 642, 6th Floor, Radhakrishna Vidyalaya, behind Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Sunder Nager, Malad (west), Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400064 PAN No. AACCI3766N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Ms. Rutuja N. Pawar & Ms. Sneha More Revenue by : Shri. K. C. Selvamani Date of hearing: 15/06/2023 Date of pronouncement : 08/09/2023 O R D E R PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM: This appeal by the R…

Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD) Circle-3, Ferozepur vs. Measage Om Sons Marketing Private Limited, Faridkot

In the result, the appeal of the revenue bearing ITA No

ITA 407/ASR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Jul 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 37(1)Section 56(2)(viib)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.407/Asr/2019 Assessment Year: 2015-16 JCIT, (OSD), Circle-3, Vs. M/s Om Sons Marketing Ferozepur. Pvt. Ltd. Quila Chowk, Faridkot (Punjab) (Appellant) [PAN: -AAACO8962E] (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, Adv. Respondent by Sh. S. R. Kaushik,CIT.DR Date of Hearing 21.06.2023 Date of Pronouncement 07.07.2023 ORDER Per:Anikesh Banerjee, JM: The instant appeal of the revenue was filed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 13(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Sodexo Facilities Management Services India Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

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

ITA 2945/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Ms.Kavitha Rajagopaldcit, Sodexo Facilities Circle-13(2)(2), Management Services बनाम/ Mumbai. India Pvt.Ltd., 1St Floor, Vs. Gemstar Commercial Complex, Ramchandra Lane, Extension Kanchpada, Malad West, Mumbai-400064. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. :Aabcs4166M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri A.N.Bhalekar, Sr.Ar ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By: Shri Mrunal Parekh सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing 16/05/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 25/05/2023 आदेश / Order Per Om Prakash Kant- Am: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 20.09.2022 Passed By Ld Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [“In Short The Ld. Cit(A)”]For Assessment Year (“Ay”) 2012-13, Raised Following Grounds: -

For Appellant: Shri A.N.Bhalekar, Sr.ARFor Respondent: Shri Mrunal Parekh
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151(1)Section 43(6)(c)Section 50B(3)

…P a g e the valuation, the AO cannot find fault in the said recognized method and adopting the method of his own choice. In support of this, he relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Vodafone M-Pesa Ltd. v PCIT (2018) 164 DTR 257/ 256 Taxman 240 (Bom)(HC). As far as the worth of food division is concerned, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that assessee has followed the method prescribed under section 50B(3) of the Act alongwith Explanation (2). He submitted that in the net worth computed by the assessee and in the AO, there is only one difference. It was submitt…

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.…

Crown Chemicals Pvt Ltd., Navi Mumbai vs. ACIT 15 (1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7876/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2022AY 2015-16
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 56(2)(viib)

…uation report) lakhs (as per audited profit and loss statement) 2015-16 50.7 312.15 2016-17 216.05 491.89 3.11. The assessee also placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Vodafone M-Pesa Ltd vs. PCIT reported in 92 Taxmann.com 73 wherein it was held that as per the Income Tax Rules, the method of valuation namely NAV method or DCF 12 M/s. Crown Chemicals Pvt. Ltd., method to determine the fair market value of shares in terms of Section 56(2)(viib) of the Act has to be done or adopted at the assessee’s option and that does not open to the ld. AO to change the method…

Siddhivinaytak Poultry Breeding Farm & Hatcheries P Ltd, Pune vs. ITO, Ward -6(1), Pune

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 91/PUN/2021[2015-16AAOCS4699G]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Nov 2022

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury"नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16

Section 56(2)(viib)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Siddhivinayak Poultry Breeding Vs. ITO, Ward-6(1), Farm & Hatcheries Private Limited, Pune S.No.248, Deccan College Road, Near Sadalbaba Darga, Yerwada, Pune 411 006 PAN : AAOCS4699G Appellant Respondent Assessee by Shri Nikhil Patankar Revenue by Shri M.G. Jasnani Date of hearing 17-11-2022 Date of pronouncement 21-11-2022 आदेश / ORDER PER R.S. SYAL, VP : This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle -6, Pune vs. M/S. Sion Panvel Tollways Pvt.Ltd, Pune

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed and

ITA 489/PUN/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Nov 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

Section 57

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 489 and 249/PUN/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 ACIT, Circle-6, Vs. M/s. Sion Panvel Tollways Pvt. Ltd., Pune 35, IVRCL house, 35, Suyojna, C.H.F. Koregaon Park, Pune 411 001 PAN : AANCS4045D Appellant Respondent C.O. Nos. 48 & 49/PUN/2022 (Arising out of ITA Nos.489 & 249/PUN/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 M/s. Sion Panvel Tollways Pvt. Ltd., Vs. ACIT, Circle-6, 35, IVRCL house, 35, Pune Suyojna, C.H.F. Ko…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle -6, Pune vs. M/S. Sion Panvel Tollways Pvt.Ltd, Pune

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed and

ITA 249/PUN/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

Section 57

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 489 and 249/PUN/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 ACIT, Circle-6, Vs. M/s. Sion Panvel Tollways Pvt. Ltd., Pune 35, IVRCL house, 35, Suyojna, C.H.F. Koregaon Park, Pune 411 001 PAN : AANCS4045D Appellant Respondent C.O. Nos. 48 & 49/PUN/2022 (Arising out of ITA Nos.489 & 249/PUN/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 M/s. Sion Panvel Tollways Pvt. Ltd., Vs. ACIT, Circle-6, 35, IVRCL house, 35, Pune Suyojna, C.H.F. Ko…

ITO, Ward-4(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. Surana Metacasst(India) Pvt. Ltd, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 2339/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 Oct 2022AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri V.K. Singh, Sr. D.RFor Respondent: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Adv
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 56Section 56(2)(viib)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “C” BENCH Before: Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member And Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar, Judicial Member Assessment Year 2013-14 The ITO, Surana Metacasst Ward-4(1)(2), (India) Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad Vs 33, Maa Suswami Villa, Shahi Kutir (Appellant) Bunglow, Dafnala, Ahmedabad PAN:AANCS9110R (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri V.K. Singh, Sr. D.R. Respondent by : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Adv. & Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, A.R. Date of hearing : 20-07-2022 Date of pronouncement : 14-10-2022 आदेश/ORDER PER : T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- This appeal is filed by…

ITO Corporate Ward 4(3), Chennai vs. Kaino Infra Development Private Ltd., Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1491/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Oct 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.1491/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) The Income Tax Officer, Vs M/S. Kaino Infra Development Corporate Ward-4(3) Pvt Ltd., Chennai-34. 37, Ttk Road, Alwarpet, Chennai-600 018. Pan: Aadcr 5655E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/ Appellant By : Mr. Ar V Sreenivasan, Addl.Cit For Mr. V.Vikekananthan, Cit ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Mr. G.Seetharaman, C.A. & Mr.S.Sundararaman, C.A सुनवाईक"तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 15.07.2022 घोषणाक"तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 12.10.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per G. Manjunatha, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-8, Chennai Dated 31.01.2019 & Pertains To Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The Revenue Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. The Order Of The Ld.Cit(A) Is Contrary To Law & Facts Of The Case. 2. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Allowing The Assessee'S Appeal By Stating That The Assessee Company Has Sufficiently & Reasonably Justified The Share Premium Received Of Rs.168.60 Crores For The Year.

For Appellant: Mr. AR V Sreenivasan, Addl.CIT for Mr. V.Vikekananthan, CITFor Respondent: Mr. G.Seetharaman, C.A. &
Section 56(2)(vii)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी वी.दुगा" राव, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी जी.मंजुनाथ, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.1491/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) The Income Tax Officer, Vs M/s. Kaino Infra Development Corporate Ward-4(3) Pvt Ltd., Chennai-34. 37, TTK Road, Alwarpet, Chennai-600 018. PAN: AADCR 5655E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/ Appellant by : Mr. AR V Sreenivasan, Addl.CIT for Mr. V.Vikekananthan, CIT ""यथ"क"ओर…

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)

…ed by the AO we notice that the ITAT, Bangalore Bench in the case of VBHC Value Homes Pvt. Ltd., Vs ITO in ITA No.2541/Bang/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 S…

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…

Dy CIT. Circle-1, Thane vs. M/S Travecom Global P. Ltd., Bhayander

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 59/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bledcit – Circle 1 V. M/S. Travecom Global Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 22, B-Wing B/607, Krishnakunj 6Th Floor, Ashar I.T. Park Salasar Brij Bhoomi Wagle Industrial Estate Bhayander (W)-401101 Thane (W)-400604 Pan: Aaect8729Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Aarti Vissanji Department By : Shri B.K. Bagchi

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti VissanjiFor Respondent: Shri B.K. Bagchi
Section 143(2)Section 56(2)(viib)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DCIT – Circle 1 v. M/s. Travecom Global Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 22, B-Wing B/607, Krishnakunj 6th Floor, Ashar I.T. Park Salasar Brij Bhoomi Wagle Industrial Estate Bhayander (W)-401101 Thane (W)-400604 PAN: AAECT8729Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Ms. Aarti Vissanji Department by : Shri B.K. Bagchi Date of Hearing : 26.05.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 28.06.2022 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (AM) 1. This appeal is filed by the revenue against order…

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

…7) (Bang.) and submitted that the AO is not entitled to change the method of valuing shares. We notice, in the above said case, the co- ordinate bench has followed the decision rendered by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Vodafone M-Pesa Ltd Vs Pr.CIT 164 DTR 257 and held that the AO cannot change the method of valuation adopted by the assessee. For the sake of convenience, we extract below the relevant observations made by the co-ordinate bench in the case of Futura Business Solutions (supra):- “17. With regard to the correctness of DCF method adopted by the Assessee for valuing shares and the procedure…