This analysis explores the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal decision for ITA No. 960/Del/2020, where the Income Tax Officer from Ward-23(1), New Delhi, challenged the valuation of share premium by Shradha MH One TV Network Pvt Ltd. The case pertains to the assessment year 2016-17, with proceedings conducted via video conferencing and a final decision pronounced on July 19, 2022.
The case centers on the assessment conducted by the Income Tax Officer for the fiscal year 2016-17, wherein Shradha MH One TV Network Pvt Ltd, a company engaged in broadcasting and telecasting, reported a nil income in its returns. Subsequent scrutiny led to a significant reassessment, focusing particularly on the valuation of share premiums.
The tribunal reviewed the appeal against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) order that had previously granted relief to Shradha MH One. The primary contention was the addition of Rs. 10,74,52,800 assessed as income from share premium received above the fair market value, deemed under section 56(2)(viib) of the IT Act, 1961.
Detailed examination of the company’s financial operations revealed that during the year, 4720 equity shares were issued at a significantly higher rate than the nominal value, based on a pending share application money dated back to March 31, 2014. The tribunal was tasked with determining whether the share issuance at a premium was justifiably assessed for additional taxes under the IT regulations.
The appellant, represented by CA Vinod Kumar Bindal and Ms. Rinky Sharma, argued that the shares were issued as part of a strategic investment from SKF, with terms agreed upon in prior fiscal years, thereby challenging the applicational timing of section 56(2)(viib). The Revenue, represented by Ms. Sunita Singh, countered that the premium was excessively above the fair market value, necessitating adjustment.
After considering the arguments, the tribunal, led by Shri Anil Chaturvedi and Ms. Astha Chandra, concluded that the share premium was within reasonable bounds considering the business projections and past agreements. The ruling emphasized that the transaction complied with existing legal frameworks and that the application of section 56(2)(viib) was not warranted in this context due to the specific circumstances and timing of the share issuance.
The tribunal’s decision to dismiss the Revenue’s appeal highlights the importance of context in financial assessments and the need for precise application of tax laws. This case sets a precedent for how share valuations, particularly premiums, should be handled in the context of business agreements and prior arrangements.
Order pronounced in the open court on July 19, 2022.
Manage the increasing number of hearings effortlessly by leveraging the legal AI revolution We are India's Leading revolutionary AI-powered legal platform where you can get enough insights into top cases and judgements.
Research Platform