Customs valuation must use comparable contemporary imports, while confiscation fines and penalties require proportionate recalculation on reassessed v...
Depositor-protection proceedings prevail over corporate insolvency, while liquidators may recover chit receivables using copies of seized company reco...
Intermediary service classification fails where overseas admission facilitation is supplied independently, preserving export treatment and small-provi...
Satellite transponder bandwidth is telecommunication, not Business Support Service; foreign non-telegraph providers triggered no service tax liability...
Commitment proceedings gain extended timelines, structured defect refiling, and automatic resumption of inquiry after the adjusted completion period e...
Centralised assessment transfer becomes unwarranted once the searched person's assessment is complete, requiring restoration to the appropriate charge...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
321 to 340 of 96333 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Under section 56(2)(viib), once an assessee adopts the prescribed DCF method under Rule 11UA for valuing unquoted equity shares, the Assessing Officer cannot discard that valuation merely because subsequent actual results differ from the original projections. The Tribunal noted that DCF valuation is inherently projection-based and cannot be reworked by substituting later actual figures, nor can the Officer switch to NAV valuation when that method was not chosen by the assessee. As the assessee relied on a qualified valuation report and the Revenue showed no cogent material of perversity, the share premium addition was deleted and the appeal was allowed.
Under section 56(2)(viib), once an assessee adopts the prescribed DCF method under Rule 11UA for valuing unquoted equity shares, the Assessing Officer cannot discard that valuation merely because subsequent actual results differ from the original projections. The Tribunal noted that DCF valuation is inherently projection-based and cannot be reworked by substituting later actual figures, nor can the Officer switch to NAV valuation when that method was not chosen by the assessee. As the assessee relied on a qualified valuation report and the Revenue showed no cogent material of perversity, the share premium addition was deleted and the appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
