ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. BILAKHIA HOLDINGS P. LTD.
INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
Bilakhia Holdings P. Ltd.
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) ALL these cross appeals have been filed against the separate orders of Ld. CIT(A) dated 20 -01 -2009. Since all these appeals belong to same assessee, we are disposing them by passing a consolidated order.
(2.) AT the time of hearing both the parties agreed that ITA Nos. 982/Ahd/2009 and 1035/Ahd/2009 for assessment year 2002 -03 are lead cases as Ld. CIT(A) has followed the order for assessment year 2002 -03 in rest of the
assessment years. So both the parties advanced their arguments inrespect of grounds for assessment year
2002 -03 which will take care rest of the years as grounds in those years are similar. Synopsis of the arguments was also filed on behalf of the assessee, Revenue did not file any such synopsis despite opportunity for the
same was given on 21.03.2014. Ld. CIT -DR was of the view that revenue's submission/arguments have been
fairly incorporated in the synopsis of arguments filed by assesssee -company. So these synopsis were relied
upon by us for the arguments advanced by both the parties.
We will first take up revenue's appeal in ITA No. 982/Ahd/2009 A.Y. 2002 -03
(3.) REVENUE has taken following grounds: -
"1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in holding that shares were received by the assessee as gift without consideration whereas the same were received under Family Arrangement.
2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate that transfer under Family Arrangement is for a consideration which is monetary and therefore cannot be termed as gift.
3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate that Clause -6 of Family Arrangement clearly records the consideration being "to avoid any further disputes ,.,.,, " and therefore transfer being a consideration cannot be termed as gift.
4. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate that basic ingredient i.e. natural love and affection was not there in these share transactions and hence these share transaction cannot be treated as gift.
5. The leaned CIT(A) has erred in observing that the AO has considered the transactions as a discounted purchase when in fact the AO has held that in view of Family Arrangement, the transaction cannot be considered as gift without consideration.
6. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 14,17,11,839/ - being amount received by the assessee from its directors by way of gift and on account of assignment of right to receive back the loans without considering the facts brought in by the AO in its entirety."
Ground No. 1 to 5 relate to nature of receipts of shares by the assessee -company;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.