https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758541 ITAT Delhi allowed the assessee's appeal against CIT's revision order u/s 263. CIT directed AO to recompute income by adding difference in share valuation u/s 56(2)(viib), claiming valuation report was missing from assessment files. ITAT found AO was satisfied with Rs. 310 per share premium charged to family members, with full payment received in October 2013. CIT failed to examine the valuation report produced by assessee or identify any fault in valuation methodology before invoking Section 263. ITAT held CIT's revision was erroneous as no proper examination was conducted. en-us Thu, 29 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 16 Sep 2024 07:59:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758541 ITAT Delhi allowed the assessee's appeal against CIT's revision order u/s 263. CIT directed AO to recompute income by adding difference in share valuation u/s 56(2)(viib), claiming valuation report was missing from assessment files. ITAT found AO was satisfied with Rs. 310 per share premium charged to family members, with full payment received in October 2013. CIT failed to examine the valuation report produced by assessee or identify any fault in valuation methodology before invoking Section 263. ITAT held CIT's revision was erroneous as no proper examination was conducted. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 29 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758541