“Section 56(2)(vib)”

Section References (mined)Section 56Section 56(2)(vib)27 judgments

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

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

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

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

{ "clean_text": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘A' Bench, Hyderabad\nBEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT\nAND

KARADI PATH EDUCATION COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. COMMISSIONER, CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1848/CHNY/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Feb 2026AY 2018-2019

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

taxmann.com 37 (Mumbai-\nTrib.) (please refer paper book page number (\"PB\") 410, paragraph 10], wherein\nthe Tribunal held that Section 56(2)(vib) triggers at the time of receipt of\nconsideration, not at the stage of share allotment.\nFurther, in ACIT v. Diach Chemicals & Pigments Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 546/Kol/2017 ... nRule 11UA(2)(b) (pre-amendment) mandates that for determining FMV of unquoted\nequity shares using the DCF method under section 56(2)(vib), the valuation must\n:-14-:\nITA. No:1848/Chny/2025\nbe conducted by a \"merchant banker.\" The Appellant obtained the report from a\nCA, not a merchant banker

DIABETOMICS MEDICAL PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the three appeals of the Assessee\nare partly allowed

ITA 2149/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

For Appellant: \nCA MV Prasad AndFor Respondent: \nMS U Mini Chandran, CIT-DR

Section 56(2)(viib)

consideration for issue of shares received\nby a Venture Capital Undertaking from specified fund shall be\noutside the rigors of section 56(2)(vib) of the Act. Therefore, for\nfalling into the exemption, two conditions are to be satisfied-\n1. Assessee needs to be a Venture capital undertaking

DIABETOMICS MEDICAL PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 2148/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

For Appellant: \nCA MV Prasad AndFor Respondent: \nMS U Mini Chandran, CIT-DR

Section 56(2)(viib)

DIABETOMICS MEDICAL PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 2147/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

For Appellant: CA MV Prasad AndFor Respondent: MS U Mini Chandran, CIT-DR

Section 56(2)(viib)

HERO FINCORP LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 11(1), DELHI, C.R. BUILDING

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2542/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 251(1)Section 56(2)(viib)

nITA No. 2542/Del/2024\n04. It is evident that the subscribers to the above-share capital were all non-\nresidents on which provisions of section 56(2)(vib) is not applicable. Hence, as\nper the submission of the assessee company and records available, the\ncontention of the assessee is found

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), PUNE vs. SANGHVI BEAUTY AND TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED , PUNE

In the result, both the appeal filed by the Revenue as well\nas Cross Objection filed by the assessee are allowed for\nstatistical purposes

ITA 2120/PUN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 Nov 2025AY 2021-22

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

{ "clean_text": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\nPUNE BENCHES “B”, PUNE\nBEFORE DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nAND SHRI

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. KAUSHALYA NIRMAN PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

Appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1068/KOL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: The Addl. Cit, Central Range-3, Kolkata For Perusal & Onwards Transmission To The Ld. Pr. Cit, Central-2. Kolkata. Subsequently, On 07.05.2024 The Ld. Pr. Cit Accorded Approval For Filing Appeal Before The Hon'Ble Itat, Kolkata. After Receiving The Approval, The Following Documents Have Been Prepared (Three Copies Each) For Filing The Appeal Before The Hon'Ble Itat, Kolkata. 1) Form No. 36

Section 250Section 56(2)(vib)

facts and in law by deleting the addition of Rs. 4,22,38,464/ on account of receipt of share premium under section 56(2)(vib) of the Act on the basis of fresh documents submitted by the assessee. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts

M/S. PARVESH CONSTRUCTION PVT LTD ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 8(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2714/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2025AY 2011-12

Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 56(2)(viib)Section 68

{ "clean_text": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\nMUMBAI BENCH “C” MUMBAI\nBEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER)\nAND

TRIVENI KNITS PRIVATE LIMITED ,LUDHIANA vs. ITO WARD 1 (3), LUDHIANA

ITA 246/CHANDI/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Mehru, CA and Shri Dev Mehru, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 56(2)(vib)Section 56(2)(viib)Section 69

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"ीगढ़ "ायपीठ “बी” , च"ीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “B”, CHANDIGARH HEARING

M/S ACCORD MEDIPLUS PVT LTD,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), PUNE, PUNE

ITA 16/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Section 147Section 56(2)

erred in law and on facts, in\nsustaining/making the addition of Rs.8,96,41,183/- without\nappreciating the real intent behind introduction of section 56(2) (vib)\nof ITA, 1961 was as an anti-abusive provision and therefore, when all\ninvestors are found to be genuine and bonafide investors, having ... from the assessee, which has been\ndiscussed above and has been dealt with as per the provisions of IT\nAct 1961. While introducing section 56(2)(vib) of the Act, to the\nparliament, special mention was made by the Honorable FM in\nrespect of closely held companies as well

FLY WITH VIP ONLINE PRIVATE LIMITED,SEWRI MUMBAI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 5(1)(2), MUMBAI

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

ITA 4656/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. B.R. Baskaran & Shri. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri Ravikant PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Kumar (SR.AR.)

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

relevant assessment year. Therefore, this exemption does not apply to the assessment year 2013-14. the addition made by the AO under section 56(2)(vib) is justified. The premium received is not supported by the Appellant's business operations during the year under consideration. In view of the above

M/S WISLEY REAL ESTATE PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-11(3), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 55/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 55/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 M/S. Wisley Real Estate Pvt. Ltd.,…..........Appellant 86C, Viswakarma, 1St Floor, Topsia Road, Tiljala, Kolkata-700046 [Pan:Aakcs8704L] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……..........................Respondent Ward-11(3), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri A.K. Tulsyan, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : 18Th March, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: June 6Th , 2024 O R D E R

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 234BSection 68

examined whether, this excess premium paid by the subscribers is to be construed as a gift to the assessee within the meaning of section 56(2)(vib) of the Income Tax Act but held that this provision is applicable from

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), NEW DELHI, C.R. BUILDING vs. ASR MARKET VENTURES PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3161/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2016-17]

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

Form No. 2 and hence the provisions of section 56(2)(viib) of the Act are not applicable for the addition made under section 56(2)(vib) of the Act before February, 2019. The Department shall not file further appeal on the issue of addition made under section 56(2

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI vs. AADHAAR WHOLESALE TRADING AND DISTRIBUTION LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of revenue are dismissed and cross\nobjection of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2653/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Apr 2024AY 2011-12

For Respondent: \nShri. Madhur Agrawal

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 68