FMV for section 56(2)(viib) determined by assessee accountant as per DCF method prescribed u/r 11 UA(2) was proper

Cinestaan Entertainment P. Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) Conclusion: Where there was an option under Rule 11UA(2) to determine the FMV by either the ‘DCF Method’ or the ‘NAV Method’, AO had no jurisdiction to discard the valuation report of the CA mainly on the ground that valuation of equity shares carried out by assessee was based on projection of revenue which did not match with the actual revenues of the subsequent years. Moreover, top and independent investors had invested in assessee’s start-up proved that the FMV as determined by assessee was proper. Held: Assessee-co...