|
Cashless ESOP benefits are not taxable
The assessee, an employee of Johnson & Johnson (âJ&Jâ) India, received from J&J, USA, on 12.7.1989 a âcashlessâ option to buy 2500 shares at the then prevailing market price of $ 57.88 per share. The options were exercisable in installments over 10 years starting 11.7.1991. On 13.8.1992 (AY 1993-94), the assessee âsoldâ the options and made a gain of Rs. 5,44,925. The AO held that the said gain was assessable in AY 1993-94 as either salary, short-term capital gain or speculation profit. On appeal, the CIT (A) held that the âsharesâ obtained under the ESOP were a capital asset and as they were held for less than 3 years, the gain was assessable as a STCG. He rejected the argument that as there was no âcost of acquisitionâ, the capital gains were not assessable. On further appeal, HELD, allowing the appeal:
(i) As the CIT (A) had held that the shares acquired under ESOP amounted to acquisition of a capital asset, one had to proceed on that premise;
(ii) In granting approval to the ESOP, the RBI had stipulated that no payment could be made while exercising the right to purchase shares. Accordingly, there was no âcost of acquisitionâ and in accordance with B. C. Srinivasa Setty 128 ITR 294 (SC), the gains could not be taxed;
(iii) Even if it is assumed that the market value of the share is the benefit given to the assessee, such benefit can be said to accrue to the assessee only on the date of exercise of the option. As the date of exercise of the option as well as the date of sale is the same, there was no difference between the âdeemed cost of acquisitionâ and the actual price realized by the assessee and thus there was no taxable gain.
Related Judgements
- Rupee Finance vs. ACIT (ITAT Mumbai)
Where the assessee purchased shares at a price below the market price and the question was whether the difference between the market price and the purchase price can be assessed as unexplained investment u/s 69 or as a benefit u/s 28(iv) of the Act, held: (1) Where there…
- ACIT vs. Prakash I. Shah (ITAT Mumbai) (Special Bench)
However, where such gain relates to exports made in an earlier year, the deuction u/s 80HHC is allowable only in the year in which the exports are made and not in the year of realisation of the gain.
- Sumit Bhattacharya vs. ACIT (ITAT Mumbai Special Bench)
(i) Amounts received by an assessee from the foreign holding company of his employer company on redemption of stock appreciation rights, being “fruits of employment” is chargeable to tax as “salaries” despite the absence of an employer-employee relationship (ii) there is a fundamental difference between stock options and stock…


to download the file. You will need a PDF reader to view the files. You can download one for free from 
