Latest Income-Tax Details

For Full Access To All Latest Judgments on Income Tax
Click Here To Subscribe Now
Take a tour of our Income-Tax Library

Whether the Tribunal was correct in holding that the transfer of appellant's non transmission and distribution business valued at Rs. 41.3 Crores in exchange of issuance and allotment of equity shares under a scheme of arrangement approved by the Calcutta High Court under sections 391 and 393 of the Companies Act, 1956 is a slump sale and exigible to capital gain tax under section 50B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?

Shanti Prime Publication Pvt. Ltd.

Sec. 50B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 - Capital gain - The Tribunal, while discussing the issue, referred to the valuation arrived by the accountants at Rs. 41.70 Crores. However, this valuation does not pertain to the assessee, but pertains to the valuation of the T & D business of the assessee whereas the case relates to a non T & D business and in the valuation report submitted by M/s. A. F. Fergusaon & Co., dated 17-5-2004, in the summary of valuation, the value of T & D business units worked out to Rs. 417 million (Rs.41.70 Crores). Thus, the Tribunal committed a factual mistake in referring to a valuation report not concerning the transaction, which was the subject matter of assessment and accordingly, The Tribunal observed that the value of the net assets of the non T & D business was determined at Rs.31.30 Crores whereas in the scheme, it had been mentioned as Rs.41.30 Crores and faulted the assessee for not explaining the difference of Rs. 10 crores. The explanation given by the assessee is satisfactory because the net asset value of the non T & D business was determined at Rs. 31.30 Crores as on 31-12-2005. After following the agreed procedure, the fair value was computed at Rs. 413 million and this has been clearly set down in the statement filed under section 393 of the Companies Act before the High Court of Calcutta in C.P.No.164 of 2006. Thus, the assessee is entitled to succeed and the substantial questions of law framed for consideration are to be answered in their favour. - AREVA T & D (I) LTD. V/s CIT - [2020] 428 ITR 001 (MAD)