ENN VEE HOLDINGS PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 31, NEW DELHI

In the result, the addition made u/s 68 and u/s 56(2)(viib) in the case of M/s Realtime Marketing Pvt

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Yogesh Kumar Us

56(2)(viib). 21. Heard the arguments of both the parties and perused the material available on record. Realtime Marketing & ENN VEE Holdings Pvt. Ltd. 22. With regard to the statement of Sh. Ashok Jain recorded on 22.04.2017 which is also one of the basis for making the addition, we have considered the order of the Tribunal in the case

INDIA TODAY ONLINE PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 12(2), NEW DELHI

In the result both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuita Nos. 6453 & 6454/Del/2018 Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15

disallowing the premium of Rs. 20 paid on such shares aggregating to 2,40,83,333 shares during the year after invoking the provision of section 56(2)(viib

INDIA TODAY ONLINE PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 12(2), NEW DELHI

In the result both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuita Nos. 6453 & 6454/Del/2018 Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15

disallowing the premium of Rs. 20 paid on such shares aggregating to 2,40,83,333 shares during the year after invoking the provision of section 56(2)(viib

ABHIRVEY PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-1(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

section 56(2)(viib) read with Rule 11UA whose fair market value of the share i.e. Rs. 50/- was done on the basis of Discounted Cash Flow Method which was work out by one of the know Merchant Banker i.e. M/s SPA Capital Advisors Ltd. 3. For the assessment year 2014-15, the assessee filed Its return of income

BIGFOOT RETAIL SOLUTION PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 5(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year: 2015-16

section 56(2)(viib) is applicable to the case of the assessee and decide ground No. 2 in favour of the assessee. 6. Ground No. 3 relates to disallowance

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

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

section 56(2)(viib) read with Rule 11UA(2)(b). 5. Ld. Assessing Officer however, was unimpressed by the valuation technique adopted by the valuer and held that the valuer has prepared the valuation report based on projections provided by the management. To investigate the matter further Ld AO has: (a) Recorded statement under oath of the Valuer on 17th

TECHPARK HOTELS PVT LTD,GURGAON vs. ADDI. CIT SPECIAL RANGE-9, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumartechpark Hotels Pvt. Ltd., Addl. Cit, Ground Floor, Central Wing, Special Range-9, Thapar House 124, Janpath, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi-110001. Pan-Aabce5833H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Neeraj Jain, Adv. & Shri Tavish Verma, Adv. Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra Sr. Dr Department By Date Of Hearing 20.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 20.03.2026 O R D E R Per Vimal Kumar, Jm: The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against Order Dated 11.09.2019 Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), New Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Ld. Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’] Arising Out Of Assessment Order Dated 30.12.2017 Of The Ld. Assessing Officer U/S 143(3) Of The Act For Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Return Declaring Loss Of Rs.23,06,28,106/- On 30.11.2015. Notice U/S 143(2) Dated 22.09.2016 Was Issued. Notices U/S 142(1) Were Issued. Sh. Nikhil Agarwal & Shri Nirmal Malpani, Ca Appeared & Filed Details. On Completion Of Proceedings, Ld. Ao Vide Order Dated Techpark Hotels Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Acit

Disallowance made under section 56(2) (vii) (b) of the Act 2 That the CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in affirming the addition of Rs.9,06,45,649, on account of alleged excessive premium received on issuance of shares in terms of section 56(2)(viib

ACIT, CIRCLE-7(2), NEW DELHI vs. DRISHTI SOFT SOLUTIIONS PRIVATE LIMITED, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Yogesh Kumar Usacit Vs. Drishti Soft Solutions Pvt. Circle – 7(2), Ltd., F-2, 40 Feet Road, New Delhi Ganga Vihar, Gokulpur, New Delhi – 110 094 Pan No. Aabcd 9373 R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri K. M. Gupta, Adv. & Shri Rishabh Malhotra, A.R. Revenue By Shri T. James Singson, Cit-D.R. Date Of Hearing: 06.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 10.02.2023 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am : This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 19.09.2019 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, New Delhi Relating To Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case As Culled Out From The Material On Record Are As Under :-

Section 56(2)(viib) of the Act. Considering the totality of the aforesaid facts, we find no ACIT vs. M/s. Drishti Soft Solutions Pvt. Ltd. 9 reason to interfere with the order of CIT(A) on this issue and thus the ground of Revenue is dismissed. 12. Ground No.2 is with respect to the deleting the addition of Rs.1

KBC INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD-14(3), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2016-17

disallowance. In this context, learned counsel drew my attention to the speech of Hon’ble Finance Minister while introducing the Finance Bill, 2012, wherein section 56(2)(viib

PR. COMMISSIONER OFLNCOME TAX-2 vs. M/S CINESTAAN ENTERTAINMENT PVT LTD

The appeal is dismissed along with pending

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ASHA MENON

56(2)(viib) read with Section 2(24)(xvi), in view of the show cause notice discussed in the paragraphs below. 2. During the course of the assessment proceedings, a show cause notice vide letter dated 15.12.20 17 was issued fixing the case for Digitally Signed By:SAPNA SETHI Signing Date:05.03.2021 15:45 Signature Not Verified ITA 1007/2019 Page

RUGBY REGENCY P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE-21, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2015-16 M/S. Rugby Regency P. Ltd. Vs. Addl. Cit, 37-Ring Road, Range-21, Lajpat Nagar-Iv, New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 024 Pan Aagcr5908K (Appellant) (Respondent)

56(2)(viib) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the “Act”) on 23.12.2017 u/s 143(3) of the Act. 4. Aggrieved, the assessee appealed before the Ld. CIT(A) but without any success. This has brought the assessee before the Tribunal and Ground No. 1 and 2 with their sub-grounds relate thereto. 5. Ground

RIVET HEALTH CLUB PVT LTD,FARIDABAD vs. ITO WARD - 2(2), FARIDABAD

disallowance of business expenses were also deleted. The addition on account of difference in receipts was deleted as it was based on a wrong amount.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": [ "Section 143(3)", "Section 68", "Section 56(2)(viib

VERSATILE POLYTECH P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-15, NEW DELHI

In the result, ITA No.2257/Del/2018 filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2009-10 Acit, Vs Versatile Polytech P. Ltd., Central Circle-15, 25, Bazar Lane, New Delhi. Superior House, Bangali Market, New Delhi. Pan: Aaccv1244Q Assessment Year: 2014-15 Versatile Polytech P. Ltd., Vs. Acit, 25, Bazar Lane, Central Circle-15, Superior House, New Delhi. Bangali Market, New Delhi. Pan: Aaccv1244Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri V.K. Aggarwal, Ar & Ms Shweta Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Smt. Sulekha Verma, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 06.02.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : .03.2019 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am:

disallowance can be made in relation to that assessment year in exercise of powers under section 153A of the Act and the earlier assessment shall have to be reiterated. ” 34. Before the learned CIT (A), the assessee has produced the copy of bank account of all the share applicant companies. The CIT (A) has admitted the same as, additional evidence

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-15, NEW DELHI vs. VERSATILE POLYTECH P.LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, ITA No.2257/Del/2018 filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2009-10 Acit, Vs Versatile Polytech P. Ltd., Central Circle-15, 25, Bazar Lane, New Delhi. Superior House, Bangali Market, New Delhi. Pan: Aaccv1244Q Assessment Year: 2014-15 Versatile Polytech P. Ltd., Vs. Acit, 25, Bazar Lane, Central Circle-15, Superior House, New Delhi. Bangali Market, New Delhi. Pan: Aaccv1244Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri V.K. Aggarwal, Ar & Ms Shweta Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Smt. Sulekha Verma, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 06.02.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : .03.2019 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am:

disallowance can be made in relation to that assessment year in exercise of powers under section 153A of the Act and the earlier assessment shall have to be reiterated. ” 34. Before the learned CIT (A), the assessee has produced the copy of bank account of all the share applicant companies. The CIT (A) has admitted the same as, additional evidence

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. JAYPEE CAPITAL SERVICES LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, ITA.No.3559/Del

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

disallowance of Rs.67,98,422/-, is deleted. 3.3. So far as addition of Rs.113,31,36,000/- made by the A.O. by invoking the provisions of Section 56(2)(viia) is concerned, the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the same by observing as under : “14.4. I have carefully considered the assessment order, written submissions, case laws relied upon and oral arguments

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. JAYPEE CAPITAL SERVICES LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, ITA.No.3559/Del

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

disallowance of Rs.67,98,422/-, is deleted. 3.3. So far as addition of Rs.113,31,36,000/- made by the A.O. by invoking the provisions of Section 56(2)(viia) is concerned, the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the same by observing as under : “14.4. I have carefully considered the assessment order, written submissions, case laws relied upon and oral arguments

RAJ SHEELA GROWTH FUND (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 21(1), NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L. P. Sahu

viib) has clearly provided that, if a person receives after 1st day of June 2010 any property being shares of a company and if the consideration is less than aggregate Fair Market Value of the property, then the amount exceeding such Fair Market Value has to be brought within the taxing net. Thus, even if some hardship may have been

INDIA CONVENTION AND CULTURE CENTRE PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 12(2), NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2014-15 M/S India Convention & Culture Vs Ito, Centre Pvt. Ltd., Ward-12(2), House No.4, Road No.71, New Delhi. Punjabi Bagh West, Delhi – 110 026. Pan: Aaecg2115M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ved Jain, Advocate & Shri Rishabh Jain, Ca Revenue By : Mrs. Naina Soin Kapil, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.09.2019 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 1St November, 2017 Of The Cit(A)-4, New Delhi Relating To Assessment Year 2014-15. [[[[ 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Company & Filed Its Return Of Income On 29Th September, 2014, Declaring The Loss Of Rs.3,56,772/-. During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, The Assessing Officer Noted That The Assessee Company Has Allotted 70 Lac Equity Shares Of Rs.10 Each At A Premium Of Rs.5 Per Share To The Following Companies:-

section 56(2)(viib) of the IT Act. On the basis of various details filed in the balance sheet, the Assessing Officer determined the paid up value of equity shares of Rs.10/- each at Rs.6.65 crores which is as under:- “Total assets – Total Liability/Total paid up value of the share 47,57,29,526 – 40,85,69,537/1