Effective hearing in GST adjudication requires actual opportunity to respond; ineffective service through a former auditor invalidated ex parte procee...
Third-party search material requires special assessment route, rendering general reassessment notices without jurisdiction when it forms the proceedin...
Transfer-pricing adjustments must be confined to international associated-enterprise transactions, while functionally dissimilar comparables remain ex...
Insolvency moratorium bars income-tax revision proceedings against corporate debtors until the moratorium ends, preserving merits for later determinat...
Discounted cash flow valuation of equity shares and compulsorily...
Discounted cash flow valuation protects share premium where projections are reasonable, while audited book expenses defeat unexplained-expenditure additions.
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
Discounted cash flow valuation of equity shares and compulsorily convertible preference shares must be assessed as at the valuation date; subsequent actual cash flows, initial operating losses, or absence of positive cash flows do not alone invalidate projections. Substitution of the discounted cash flow method with net asset value valuation was therefore inappropriate, and the share-premium addition was deleted. Vendor-confirmation differences did not justify treating recorded business expenses as unexplained where audited books recorded the transactions, payments passed through banking channels, and business operations funded the expenditure; the unexplained-expenditure addition was deleted. Penalty-initiation challenges were premature because penalty proceedings remain separate from assessment proceedings.
Discounted cash flow valuation of equity shares and compulsorily convertible preference shares must be assessed as at the valuation date; subsequent actual cash flows, initial operating losses, or absence of positive cash flows do not alone invalidate projections. Substitution of the discounted cash flow method with net asset value valuation was therefore inappropriate, and the share-premium addition was deleted. Vendor-confirmation differences did not justify treating recorded business expenses as unexplained where audited books recorded the transactions, payments passed through banking channels, and business operations funded the expenditure; the unexplained-expenditure addition was deleted. Penalty-initiation challenges were premature because penalty proceedings remain separate from assessment proceedings.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.