2026 (8) TMI 1780

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., dated 16.4.2025. The dispute relates to Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The Revenue raised the following three substantial questions of law for our consideration: (i) Whether the Tribunal was correct in accepting a valuation certificate issued by a Chartered Accountant rather than an independent valuer or merchant banker under Rule 11UA of the Income-tax Rules, 1962? (ii) Whether the Tribunal erred in relying on a valuation certificate produced for the first time before it without giving the Assessing Officer an opportunity to examine it under Rule 46A of the Income-tax Rules, 1962? (iii) Whether the Tribunal was justified in accepting the share valuation of Rs. 101.93 per share when the Assessing Officer had fix....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tatutory rule itself accepts an accountant's report, the Department cannot insist that only an independent valuer or a merchant banker report is valid. 4.3. The first question of law raised by the Revenue runs directly against the plain text of Rule 11UA(1)(c)(c) of the Rules. It holds no merit and does not require further consideration. Substantial Question of Law No. 2 5.1. The Revenue argues that the valuation certificate was introduced by the assessee for the first time before the Tribunal. However, the record shows otherwise. Sub-paragraph (5) of the extract in paragraph 4 of the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) specifically records as under: "5. The appellant has furnished a valuation cert....