Just a moment...

⚠✕
❮ Top
☎ Help
AI Drafter ✕

Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.

Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review

The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.

• Review the issues identified by the AI
• Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required


Step 2 – Draft Generation

Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.

• Relevant statutory provisions
• Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations
• Issue-wise legal analysis
• Practical arguments and supporting content
• Professionally structured draft ready for further review.

Try Now →
☰
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Keyword Search :
AI Tools : New
Ask tax questions in natural language. Powered by AI trained on the TaxTMI legal database. Use AI Tools ➞
Call Us / Help / Feedback✕

Contact Us At :

✉ E-mail: [email protected]

✆ Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS
PrevPreviousNextNext

Tax Tribunal Upholds DCF Method for Share Valuation, Rejects NAV and Deletes Unwarranted Additions u/ss 56(2)(viib) & 68.

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....AO rejected DCF method for valuation of shares issued as rights issue to existing shareholders. Instead, AO applied NAV method u/r 11UA determining FMV at Rs.3.07 per share and made addition u/s 56(2)(viib). ITAT held DCF is recognized valuation method based on future projections considering various factors. AO cannot tinker with DCF method adopted by assessee and apply NAV method. When law provides two methods, AO cannot reject one method for another without substantial reasons. Following Cinestaan, DCF valuation by assessee accepted. No addition u/s 56(2)(viib) upheld. Regarding addition u/s 68, assessee companies had sufficient reserves, revenue, borrowings to explain source. Onus of proving source discharged. Addition u/s 68 deleted. Assessee's appeal allowed.....

PrevPreviousNextNext