TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (5) TMI 951
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d both on facts and in law in passing order on the following amongst the other Grounds: "1. The CIT(A) has erred in confirming selling price of 201 shares of Chamanlal Mehta & Co. (Pvt.) Ltd. (CMPL) at Rs. 14,616/- per share estimated by the AO as against the full value of consideration received at Rs. 8,512/- per share while working out Long Term Capital Gains. It is submitted that as per the provisions of Section 48 and judgements of various Hon. Courts, full value of consideration denotes the actual amount received which is Rs. 8,512/- per share and not Rs. 14,616/- as estimated by the AO and therefore, the CIT(A) ought to have accepted Rs. 8,512./- per share as the full value of consideration. 2. The CIT(A) ha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er share. The Assessing Officer observed that the shares are held by the descendent of Late Shri Chamanlal Girdharlal Parekh who has got this company incorporated. The company being closely held, the shares are neither listed nor its price quoted in the open market. The transfer of shares and its price is mutually decided among family members as per family arrangement and there was restriction on sale of shares. All the shares of Chamanlal Mehta & Co. Pvt. Ltd. has been taken over by Victoria Capital Venture Limited. The Assessing Officer observed that the index value of each share has to be taken at Rs. 107.45 and thus the cost of 200 shares comes to Rs. 21,490/-, whereas sale price is taken at Rs. 14,616/- instead of Rs. 8,605/- disclosed....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... d) Eldeco Infrastructure & Properties Limited (2012) 23 Taxmann.com 17 (Delhi) 6. The Ld. AR further submitted that Section 50CA is the Section which allows the Assessing Officer to substitute the sale consideration with respect to the transfer of unquoted shares but the said Section has been inserted by Finance Act 2017 w.e.f. 01.04.2018 only. At the relevant point in time, the said Section could not have been invoked and is also not the case of Assessing Officer or CIT(A). Ld. AR relied upon the decision of Analjit Singh (2018) 92 Taxmann.com 310 (Delhi Tribunal). The Ld. AR further submitted that the Assessing Officer has correctly not invoked Section 50C in as much as what is transferred is neither land nor building, it is the sh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....b) Bajrang Prasad Ramdharani (2013) 37 Taxman.com 186 (Ahd. Tribunal) 8. The Ld. DR submitted that the CIT`(A) was right in confirming the selling price of 201 shares of Chamanlal Mehta Pvt. Ltd. at Rs. 14,615/- per share estimated by the Assessing Officer and the calculation was properly done. The Ld. DR relied upon the Assessment Order and the order of the CIT(A). As regards to ground no. 2, the Ld. DR submitted that the disallowance of deduction of rent paid at Rs. 1,86,406/- against HRA received as part of salary and, therefore, rightly comes under the purview of taxation. The Ld. DR in respect of ground no.1 has filed the following submissions :- "1. In the instant case, the assessee individual sold 201 shares of Cham....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... from the full value of the consideration received or accruing as a result of the transfer of the capital asset the following amounts, namely:- (i) expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively in connection with such transfer; (ii) the cost of acquisition of the asset and the cost of any improvement thereto... (emphasis added) 4. Had there been no power before the AO to go into the correctness of the full value of consideration, the legislature would not have added the phrase "or accruing" to the section as seen above. Therefore, simply the full value of consideration received by the assessee would have been the basis for computing the capital gains. However because the AO, as per the above quoted section, has been....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as rejected in that case as it was found that the quoted judgments differed vastly on facts." 9. Heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. It is pertinent to note that the assessee sold 201 shares of Chamanlal Mehta & Co. Pvt. Ltd. during the A.Y. under consideration at Rs. 8,605/- per share whereas another group of shareholders received Rs. 14,616/- for the same shares but from the records it is seen that another group of shareholders were occupying the premises and, therefore, they have been granted much more higher price than those who were not occupying the premises and this was an internal arrangement for selling shares. The Ld. AR's contention that the class of shareholders who are tenants an....