TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (10) TMI 173
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sessment year 2008-09. 2 The assessees raised the following common grounds of appeal: 1) The learned CIT (Appeals) erred in upholding the validity of reopening when the conditions precedence were absent. 2) Without prejudice, the learned CIT (Appeals) erred in upholding the computation of capital gains and levy of capital gains tax in respect of alleged transfer of shares in the relevant year when there was no transfer of shares in the books of the company in the name of the transferee or handing over of possession of shares to the transferee in the relevant year and consequently he ought to have refrained from upholding the levy of tax in the relevant assessment year. 3) On the facts, the learned CIT (Appeals)....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....le consideration as made by the assessing officer. 8) The learned CIT (Appeals) erred in not giving a finding with regard to the arbitrary estimation of interest which has been included in the total income of the Appellant. 9) The learned CIT (Appeals) ought to have appreciated that when no interest has accrued to the Appellant or received by the Appellant, the estimation of interest and inclusion of the same in the ottal income was opposed to law and contrary to the provisions of the Act and thus the impugned addition is liable to be deleted. 10) Without prejudice, the additions as confirmed by the learned CIT (Appeals) are arbitrary, excessive and liable to be deleted. 11) The learned CIT (Appeals) erre....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... AO further concluded that consideration of Rs. 35 crores was received during the period from 8/6/2007 to 16/10/2007 i.e. relevant assessment year 2008-09. Taking into consideration these facts, the AO concluded that transfer of sale of shares is complete and therefore, he computed capital gains on sale of such shares. The AO further made addition of Rs. 63,89,374/- on account of interest-free loans given to various persons. 4. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A), Bangalore, who vide impugned order, dismissed the appeal. While doing so, the CIT(A) was driven by the fact that entire consideration was received and the management and control of the company was taken over by the buyers of shares. As regards addition made o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....The underlying purpose of the agreement is only to transfer the shares. The fact that there was a change in the Board of Directors of the company or management or control of the company is not crucial to determine whether transfer of shares is complete. 5.2 On the other hand, ld.CIT(DR) placed reliance on the decision of the CIT(A) and the assessment order. He also placed reliance on the decision of the Chandigarh bench in the case of Mr.Shamsher Singh Dullo vs. ITO in ITA No.1219/CHD/2012 dated 31/7/2013 for the proposition that when the consideration was received and possession was handed over, the transfer is complete. 6. We heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. The only issue in this appeal is about the year ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vs. Ramaswamy (151 ITR 122), after reviewing precedents on the subject, held that transfer of shares is complete only when share certificates along with duly signed share transfer Forms were handed over to the transferee. This principle was again reiterated by the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of Rajagiri Rubber & Produce Co. vs. CIT (1993) 203 ITR 663 wherein it was held as follows: "We heard counsel. We perused the appellate order passed by the Appellate Tribunal. The relevant dates are not in dispute. It is conceded that the company passed a resolution and the share certificates were delivered and consideration was also received during the accounting period relevant to the assessment year 1978-79. As between the transfer....