TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (5) TMI 99
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssessee is directed against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Kolkata dated 25.11.2019 and the solitary issue involved therein relates to the addition of Rs. 8,25,000/- made by the AO and confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) u/s 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. The assessee in the present case is a company which is engaged in the business of manufacturing of all kinds o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ii)(b) of the Act in the assessment completed u/s 143(3) vide an order dated 11.03.2016. On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the said addition made by the AO. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal. 3. I have heard the arguments of both the sides and also perused the relevant material available on record. It is observed that the simil....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....issue including its assets. Assets include intangible assets such as goodwill, knowhow, patents, copyrights, trademarks, licences, franchises, etc. The Assessing Officer has not taken into consideration the second limb in explanation to Section 56(2)(viib) of the Act. The second limb provides that when valuation was made by the company, if the Assessing Officer is not satisfied about the valuation....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....efect or error in the valuation of shares by the assessee company, it may not be necessary to apply the method of valuation prescribed under Rule 11UA of the I.T. Rules. Therefore, this Tribunal is unable to uphold the valuation made by the Assessing Officer under Rule 11UA of the Income-tax Rules, 1962. 16. In view of the above discussion, orders of both the authorities below are set aside and ....