DCIT Vs JUS Scriptum Magnus Pvt. Ltd (ITAT Delhi)
ITAT Delhi held that approved method of share valuation as selected under Rule 56(2)(viib) of the Income Tax Rules as selected by the assessee cannot be disturbed by Assessing Officer. Accordingly, appeal of revenue dismissed.
Facts-
The assessee company was incorporated on 06.10.2003 and is engaged in the business of publishing. AO rejected the valuation report submitted by the assessee and proceeded to adopt the NAV method and determined the fair market value at Rs.64.3 per share. Accordingly, he proceeded to make the difference between share premium received and value determined under NAV method was added to the income of the assessee u/s 56(2)(viib) of the Act of Rs.8,94,55,878/-.
CIT(A) allowed the appeal of the assessee. Being aggrieved, revenue has preferred the present appeal.
Conclusion-
Held that once the assessee has selected one of the approved method under Rule 56(2)(viib), the Assessing Officer cannot disturb the same and also there are other decisions of Hon’ble Delhi High Court wherein Assessing Officer also cannot compare the projections adopted by the assessee with actual. Therefore, we are not inclined to accept the above submissions. After considering the overall facts and matrix, we do not see any reason to disturb the findings of ld. CIT (A) which is a speaking order in itself. In the result, we dismiss the appeal filed by the Revenue.
