BRAJBHUMI NIRMAAN PRIVATE LIMITED,SALT LAKE vs. ITO, WARD 2(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

price of Rs.\n189.40/share. The Id. AO is noted to have rejected this explanation on\nthe premise that the circle rates were not recorded in the books of\naccounts. For such reasons, the AO rejected the DCF valuation report\nfurnished by the assessee in terms of Rule 11UA and instead adopted\nthe book value of Rs.87.30/share

ASG LEATHER PVT. LTD., ,SOUTH 24 PARGANAS vs. ITO, WARD - 15(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap

viib) has unwittingly fell into the clutches of section 56(2)(viia) of the I.T. Act. Section 56(2)(viia) reads as follows: "Where a firm or a company not being a company in which the public are substantially interested, receives, in any previous year, from any person or persons, on or after the 1st day of June

ITO, WARD - 11(3), , KOLKATA vs. M/S. LNB RENEWABLE ENERGY PVT. LTD., , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

viib) of sub-section (2) of section 56 shall be the value, on the valuation date, of such unquoted equity shares as determined in the Page 8 of 22 I.T.A. No.: 2011/Kol/2018 C.O. No.: 117/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/s. LNB Renewable Energy Pvt. Ltd. following manner under clause (a) or clause (b), at the option of the assessee, namely

DCIT, CC-1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. JUPITER INTERNATIONAL LIMITED , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2014-15 Dcit, Cc-1(4), Kolkata ………….……………………….……….……….……Appellant Vs. Jupiter International Limited..……………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Unnayanam, 20A, Ashutosh Chowdhury Avenue, Kol-19.. [Pan: Aaacj6956B] Appearances By: Shri P. N Barnwal, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Soumitra Choudhury & Nandini Sureka, Advocate, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 12, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 21, 2026 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 29.10.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [‘Cit(A)’] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2014–15. 2. The Appeal Has Been Filed By The Revenue With A Delay Of 197 Days & The Revenue Has Filed A Petition For Condonation Of The Delay. After Going Over The Said Petition, We Find Sufficient Reasons Behind The Delay & Consequently, The Delay In Filing The Appeal Is Hereby Condoned & We Proceed To Dispose Of The Appeal On Merits.

transferred to the General Reserve, which can be distributed to shareholders, however, losses or depreciation cannot be taken from this reserve, it makes sure that a company's financial records show the real value of its assets, giving a clearer view of its finances. Therefore, it cannot be said to be a reserve set apart towards depreciation

DCIT, CIR-8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S MICROFIRM CAPITAL PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, this ground is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey]

price it would fetch if sold in the open market on the valuation date and the assessee may obtain a report from a merchant banker or an accountant in respect of which such valuation.” 9. A perusal of Section 56(2)(viib) of the Act, takes us to a conclusion that all types of shares are covered by this Section

M/S. MICROFIRM CAPITAL PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, this ground is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey]

price it would fetch if sold in the open market on the valuation date and the assessee may obtain a report from a merchant banker or an accountant in respect of which such valuation.” 9. A perusal of Section 56(2)(viib) of the Act, takes us to a conclusion that all types of shares are covered by this Section

SEEMA SUREKA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 3(3), KOLKATA

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

transfer under clause (via) or clause (vic) or clause (vich) or clause (vid) or clause (vii) of\nsection 47.\n\nExplanation.—For the purposes of this clause, “fair market value” of a property, being shares of a\ncompany not being a company in which the public are substantially interested, shall have the\nmeaning assigned to it in the Explanation

M/S. TCG LIFESCIENCES PRIVATE LIMITED.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-11(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz) & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

Section 56(2)(viib) of the Act. Thus such capital account cannot be brought to tax as already discussed herein above while considering the challenge to the grounds as mentioned in impugned order. e) ..........The ALP is meant to determine the real value of the transaction entered into between AEs. It is a re-computation exercise to be carried

BHIRINGHEE MINING & MINERALS PVT. LTD.,DURGAPUR vs. PCIT - BURDWAN, BURDWAN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawal

section 56(2)(viib) and pointed out that a deemed gift in the hands of transferee of lower price charged by the transferor would be considered on the date of transfer

ACIT, CIR.-3(2), GANGTOK vs. M/S RODIC SIKKIM PROJECT PVT. LTD, EAST SIKKIM

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal, Hon’Bleassessment Years: 2015-16 Assistant Commissioner Of M/S. Rodic Sikkim Project Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Shanti Nagar, Singtam Income-Tax, Circle-3(2), Gangtok East Sikkim - 737134 (Pan: Aahcr1752J) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Manish Tiwari, Fca Revenue By : Shri Vijay Kumar, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24/11/2022 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 20/01/2023 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A)- Siliguri Vide Appeal No. – 62/Cit(A)/Slg/2017-18 Dated 24/09/2020 For A.Y. 2015-16 Against The Assessment Order Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Income- Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Passed By Dcit, Circle – 3(2), Gangtok, Dated 30/12/2017. 2. The Grounds Taken By The Revenue Are Reproduced As Under:-

viib) of sub-section (2) of section 56 shall be the value, on the valuation date, of such unquoted equity shares as determined in the following manner under clause (a) or clause (b), at the option of the assessee, namely:— (a) the fair market value of unquoted equity shares = (A–L) × (PV), (PE) where, A = book value of the assets

M/S. EARNEST TOWERS PRIVATE LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 2(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravii.T.A. No. 2530/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Earnest Towers Private Limited……….………....………………...…………………….….Appellant [Pan : Aabce 8612 N] Vs. Acit, Circle-2(1), Kolkata………............................................................…....….…………..…...Respondent Appearances By: Shri Ajit Kumar Jain & Siddhesh Chaugule, C.A Appearing On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri P. K. Srihari, Cit- Dr, Appearing On Behalf Of The Respondent.

56(2) (viib) of the Act and included within the definition of income in Section 2(24) of the Act." 7.1.5 In these circumstances, we are of the view that the impugned transaction cannot be brought within the ambit of Indian Transfer Pricing

M/S TCG LIFESCIENCES PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-11, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Am] I.T.A No. 1053/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2010-11 A.C.I.T., Circle-11(2) -Vs.- M/S. Tcg Lifesciences Ltd. Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aabcc 0401 D] (Respondent) (Appellant) I.T.A No. 966/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2010-11 M/S. Tcg Lifesciences Pvt.Ltd. -Vs- C.I.T.(A)-22, (Formerly “Tcg Lifesciences Ltd.) Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aabcc 0401 D] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Department : Shri G.Mallikarjuna, Cit(Dr) For The Assessee : Shri S.P.Singh, Irs (Rtd.) & Shri Manoneet Dalal & Ms.Gunjan Khanna, Cas Date Of Hearing : 14.09.2017. Date Of Pronouncement : 22.09.2017. Order Per N.V.Vasudevan, Jm

56(2)(viib) of the Act and the same is enumerated as Income in Section 2(24)(xvi) of the Act. However, what is bought into the ambit of income is the premium received from a resident in excess of the fair market value of the shares. In this case what is being sought to be taxed is capital

ACIT, CIRCLE-11(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. TCG LIFESCIENCES LIMITED., KOLKATA

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Am] I.T.A No. 1053/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2010-11 A.C.I.T., Circle-11(2) -Vs.- M/S. Tcg Lifesciences Ltd. Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aabcc 0401 D] (Respondent) (Appellant) I.T.A No. 966/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2010-11 M/S. Tcg Lifesciences Pvt.Ltd. -Vs- C.I.T.(A)-22, (Formerly “Tcg Lifesciences Ltd.) Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aabcc 0401 D] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Department : Shri G.Mallikarjuna, Cit(Dr) For The Assessee : Shri S.P.Singh, Irs (Rtd.) & Shri Manoneet Dalal & Ms.Gunjan Khanna, Cas Date Of Hearing : 14.09.2017. Date Of Pronouncement : 22.09.2017. Order Per N.V.Vasudevan, Jm

56(2)(viib) of the Act and the same is enumerated as Income in Section 2(24)(xvi) of the Act. However, what is bought into the ambit of income is the premium received from a resident in excess of the fair market value of the shares. In this case what is being sought to be taxed is capital

ACIT, CIRCLE-5(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S NIRNIDHI MARKETING PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 56(2)(viib) of the Act, still the price of Rs. 1,988/- per share whereas the assessee has sold the share at Rs. 10 at share premium of Rs. 1,990/- so the difference is negligible i.e. Rs. 2/- only in excess and even as per EPS (earning per share) it comes to Rs. 1,933/- per share

CHAMUNDI EXTRUSIONS PVT. LTD., ,HOWRAH vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 36, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assess

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Hon’Ble Vice-, Kz & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon’Ble) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Chamundi Extrusions Pvt. Ltd....................................................................………………….............Appellant Village – Vyer Chak Ranihati Amta Road P.O. – Jala Biswanathpur Near Gabberia Hospital Howrah – 711 322 [Pan : Aaecc 2195 F] Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-36, Kolkata...............................………..…......Respondent Appearances By: Shri Aditya Madhogarhia, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. Cit, D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue.

2)(viib) read along with Rule iib) read along with Rule11UA and as such the addition made may kindly UA and as such the addition made may kindly be deleted.” The ld. CIT(A) did not find merit in the submission made on behalf of the The ld. CIT(A) did not find merit in the submission made on behalf

M/S TCG LIFESCIENCE PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-11(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result ITA No. 121/Kol/2016 is partly allowed while ITA No

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am]

Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) for determination of ALP of the international transaction of purchase of shares as per the provisions of Sec.92CA(1) of the Act. The TPO was of the view that DCFM was not the appropriate method of valuation and that the appropriate method would only be the Net Asset Valuation method (NAV). On the basis of such

M/S TCG LIFESCIENCES PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-11(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result ITA No. 121/Kol/2016 is partly allowed while ITA No

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am]

Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) for determination of ALP of the international transaction of purchase of shares as per the provisions of Sec.92CA(1) of the Act. The TPO was of the view that DCFM was not the appropriate method of valuation and that the appropriate method would only be the Net Asset Valuation method (NAV). On the basis of such

DEEP JYOTI WAX TRADERS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 6(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A No.6/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Deep Jyoti Wax Traders Pvt. Ltd.................................................……Appellant 157 Metal Market, Netaji Subhas Road, Bara Bazar, Kolkata-1. [Pan: Aabcd4061C] Vs. Ito, Ward-6(1), Kolkata............................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Miraj D. Shah, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 17, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 10, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 07.11.2022 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Sole Issue Raised By The Assessee Is Relating To The Addition Made By The Assessing Officer Of Rs.1,16,65,600/- U/S 56(2) Of The Act On Account Of Excess Share Premium Received By The Assessee As Compared To The Fair Market Value Of The Shares. 3. The Assessee During The Year Issued 920000 Shares @10/- Each & Further Of Rs.40/- Each Raising Total Share Capital Including Share

price of the shares issued by the assessee at Rs.27.3/- per share and he further observed that the assessee had issued shares @ Rs.40/-. He added the differential amount of Rs.11665600/- u/s 56(2)(viib) of the Act. As per the provisions of section 56(2)(viib) of the Act, the fair market value of the shares can be determined

ITO,WARD-8(2),KOL, KOLKATA vs. M/S. INDUS REALTY PVT. LTD. , KOLKATA.

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

price is justified or not, it is for the businesses to take a call. Moreover, all the share applicants are group companies and hence situations may arise where funds are transferred from one to another depending upon their consolidated business strategy and outlook. In any case, while suspicion may arise that the transaction smacks of unaccounted money being circulated