AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (2) TMI 1010
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....0 of the Act vide order dated 22/04/2021 passed for the assessment year 2014-15. 2. The assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal:- "Your appellant being dissatisfied with the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) - 13, Ahmedabad prefers this appeal against the same on the following amongst other grounds, which are without prejudice to each other. 1. The order passed by the Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] is erroneous and contrary to the provisions of law and facts and therefore requires to be suitably modified. It is submitted that it be so done now. 2. The Hon'ble CIT(A) has grossly erred in upholding action of AO in rejecting claim of appellant for ta....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Act from AY 2013-14. It is submitted that in absence of any ambiguity in law, clarificatory amendment in law does not require mechanism for its applicability. It is submitted that it be so held now. 4. The Hon'ble CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that when substantive law confers benefit to appellant under statute with retrospective effect, it ought to have been allowed by AO in the assessment. It is submitted that it be so held now. 5. The Hon'ble CIT(A) ought to have held that in the facts and circumstances of the case, in view of the retrospective amendment in section 1121)(c ) (iii) the capital gain was to be taxed at 10% in the assessment made as claimed during the course of assessment. It is submitted that....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....not. Accordingly, out of abundant caution, the assessee paid taxes of Rs. 1,46,70,19,604/- @ 21.63% (including surcharge on cess) on the sale of such "unlisted" shares of private limited company. Subsequently, Finance Act 2016 amended section 112(1)(c)(iii) of the Act to provide that long-term capital gains arising from the transfer of a capital asset being shares of the company not being company in which the public are substantially interested, shall be chargeable to tax at the rate of 10%. However, the said amendment was made applicable from assessment year 2017-18 and subsequent years. There was lack of clarity for intervening period from assessment year 2013-14 to assessment year 2016-17. Thereafter, Finance Act 2017 clarified that the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....endment is not available to appellant." 5. The assessee filed appeal before Ld. CIT(Appeals), who rejected the claim of the assessee on the ground firstly that such change of claim could have been possible only by filing the revised return of income and secondly, such effect cannot be granted to the assessee in absence to of CBDT issuing any Instruction under section 119 of the Act. While rejecting the claim of the assessee, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) observed as below: "5.6 I have diligently considered the appellant's submissions, however I am of the considered view that the AO is justified in holding that in the return of income the appellant had opted to pay tax on the LTCG on sale of shares as per the provisions of Section 112....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eing "unlisted" shares. However, he reiterated the arguments taken by Ld. CIT(Appeals) in the appellate order that such claim could have been entertained only if the assessee had made such claim by way of filing of revised return of income or in the alternative had the CBDT issued any specific Instruction on how the assessee could have claimed benefit thereof if the time of filing revised return of income was not available. 7. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record. The learned DR before us has agreed that the assessee is technically eligible to be taxed @10% on capital gain of Rs. 6,78,23,37,511/- made by way of sale of shares of its Indian associated Enterprise, Bridgestone India Private Limited, in view....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the assessee filing the claim by way of revised return of income and in absence of any specific Instruction by CBDT to this effect, in Circular Number 14 (XL-35) of 1955 dated 11-04-1955 Department has taken a view that the officers of the department must not take advantage of ignorance of the assessee about his rights and it is their duty to assist the tax payer in every reasonable way particularly in the matter of claiming and securing reliefs. Further, in the case of B. G. Shirke Construction Technology (P.) Ltd.[2017] 79 taxmann.com 306 (Bombay), the High Court has held that an assessee is entitled to make a claim before Tribunal which was not raised before Assessing Officer at time of filing return of income or by filing a revised r....