TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (8) TMI 756
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... assessee and demerger of the finance division of M/s. Homan! Tools Pvt. Ltd. does not satisfy the conditions laid down in section 2(19AA) of the income Tax Act." 3. The appellant prays that the order 'of the Ld. CIT(A) on 4he above grounds be set aside and confirm the order of the AO. 4. The appellant craves leave to amend or alter any ground or add a new ground which may be necessary." 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return of income on 26.09.2012 declaring total income to the tune at Rs. 1,50,52,094/-. The assessee revised his return of income on 01.10.2012 declaring total income to the tune of Rs. 1,50,52,094/-. The return was processed u/s 143(1) of the I. T. Act, 1961. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS. Notices u/s 143(2) & 142(1) of the Act were issued and served upon the assessee. The assessee company was engaged in the business of Rent Income, Investing Funds for earning interest. During the year under consideration, the assessee has credited the share premium of Rs. 16,50,08,000/-. The notice was given. The assessee replied that the company was the resulting company and received various assets as a result of demer....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....led investment activity is not from the activity from business but its income is from other sources as well as capital gain. Therefore, the investment activity cannot be treated as business activity of M/s. Hemant Tools Pvt. Ltd. In such circumstances, the demerger of the M/s. Hemant Tools Pvt. Ltd. with the appellant cannot be held that it was within the preview of section 2(19AA) of the Act. But, it is true that the Hon'ble Mumbai High Court had sanctioned the scheme of demerger of investment division of Hemant Tools Pvt Ltd with Jayvik Foresight Innovation and solution Companies Act, 1956. Further, M/s Hemant Tools Pvt. Ltd has large reserve & such on account demerger the appellant has shown receivables from Hemant Tools Pvt. Ltd. and interest received thereon is offered for taxation under the head income from other sources. Further, the appellant has shown income from sale of investment as capital. Thus, the identity and creditworthiness of M/s Hemant Tools Pvt Ltd and genuineness of the transaction is proved as the scheme of demerger is approved by the Hon'ble Mumbai High Court as sought by the appellant under section 391 to 395 of the Companies Act. Ther....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nuously from the Hemant Tools. What was not explained by assessee is not on record. The transaction has been properly explained and there is no iota evidence on record to which it can be assumed that the own money has been introduced which liable to be addition u/s 68 of the Act. Moreover, we noticed that the Hemant Tools Pvt. Ltd. during the investing activity which was never treated as business activity. The investment was from other sources as well as from capital gain. The investment activity was not liable to be treated as business activity of M/s. Hemant Tools Pvt. Ltd. Accordingly, demerger of the Hemant Tools Pvt. Ltd. with the appellant cannot be held within the provisions of Section 2(19AA). The facts are not distinguishable at this stage. We nowhere found illegality and infirmity and the order passed by the CIT(A) in question. Taking into account all the facts and circumstances, we are of the view that the CIT(A) has decided the matter of controversy judiciously and correctly which is not liable to be interfere with at this appellate stage. Accordingly, all these issues are decided in favour of the assessee against the revenue. Reasons for delay in pronouncement of or....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aring of these appeals was concluded on 7th January 2020, this order thereon is being pronounced today on 14th day of May, 2020, much after the expiry of 90 days from the date of conclusion of hearing. We are also alive to the fact that rule 34(5) of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules 1963, which deals with pronouncement of orders, provides as follows: (5)The pronouncement may be in any of the following manners: - (a) The Bench may pronounce the order immediately upon the conclusion of the hearing. (b) In case where the order is not pronounced immediately on the conclusion of the hearing, the Bench shall give a date for pronouncement. (c) In a case where no date of pronouncement is given by the Bench, every endeavour shall be made by the Bench to pronounce the order within 60 days from the date on which the hearing of the case was concluded but, where it is not practicable so to do on the ground of exceptional and extraordinary circumstances of the case, the Bench shall fix a future day for pronouncement of the order, and such date shall not ordinarily (emphasis supplied by us now) be a day beyond a further period of 30 days and due notice of the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....a matter of fact, it has been such an unprecedented situation, causing disruption in the functioning of judicial machinery, that Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, in an unprecedented order in the history of India and vide order dated 6.5.2020 read with order dated 23.3.2020, extended the limitation to exclude not only this lockdown period but also a few more days prior to, and after, the lockdown by observing that "In case the limitation has expired after 15.03.2020 then the period from 15.03.2020 till the date on which the lockdown is lifted in the jurisdictional area where the dispute lies or where the cause of action arises shall be extended for a period of 15 days after the lifting of lockdown". Hon'ble Bombay High Court, in an order dated 15th April 2020, has, besides extending the validity of all interim orders, has also observed that, "It is also clarified that while calculating time for disposal of matters made time-bound by this Court, the period for which the order dated 26th March 2020 continues to operate shall be added and time shall stand extended accordingly", and also observed that "arrangement continued by an order dated 26th March 2020 till 30th April 2020 shall con....