| COURT: |
|
| CORAM: |
|
| SECTION(S): |
|
| GENRE: |
|
| CATCH WORDS: |
|
| COUNSEL: |
|
| DATE: |
(Date of pronouncement) |
| DATE: |
September 4, 2008 (Date of publication) |
| AY: |
|
| FILE: |
|
| CITATION: |
|
|
|
Where the assessee transferred its undertaking under a scheme of demerger which provided that neither the assessee nor its shareholders would receive any consideration from the transferee company as the value of the liabilities taken over were more than the value of the assets taken over and the assessee treated the difference between the said liabilities and assets as a capital reserve and the question arose whether such difference was assessable to tax, Held:
(a) The scheme did not qualify as a ‘demerger’ u/s 2 (19AA) and exemption u/s 47 (vib) was not available as the resulting company had not issued any shares to the shareholders of the transferor;
(b) However, as the transfer was by way of a scheme of arrangement and not by way of a “sale”, it did not constitute a “slump sale” as defined in s. 2(42C) and consequently s. 50B had not application.
(c) In so far as the provisions of ss. 45 and 48 are concerned, as the subject matter of the transfer was a “going concern” for which a “cost of acquisition” cannot be predicated, the machinery provisions of s. 48 break down and consequently the charging provisions of s. 45 cannot apply.
Premier Automobiles 264 ITR 193 (Bom) distinguished.
The result is that the assessee is not chargeable to tax in respect of the aforesaid transfer.
Related Posts:
- Agson Global Pvt. Ltd vs. ACIT (ITAT Delhi) Assessee produced sufficient documentary evidences before the A.O. to prove that money routed from the assessee itself which came back to the assessee in the form of share capital/premium, therefore, assessee proved identity of the Investors, their creditworthiness and genuineness of the transaction in the matter and as such have…
- Teleperformance Global Services Private Limited vs. ACIT (Bombay High Court) The consequence of approved scheme of amalgamation was that amalgamating company had ceased to exist and on its ceasing to exist, it cannot be regarded as a person against whom assessment proceeding can be initiated. In said case before notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued on 26.9.2013,…
- Technimont Pvt Ltd vs. ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) The effect of Hon’ble Supreme Court’s judgment in PVAL Kulandagan Chettiar 267 ITR 654 (SC) thus was clearly overruled by the legislative developments. It was specifically legislated that the mere fact of taxability in the treaty partner jurisdiction will not take it out of the ambit of taxable income of…
- Kamal Galani vs. ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) It is the case of the Ld. AO that account with HSBC bank , Geneva is opened by resident Indian and black money earned by such resident Indian has been stashed abroad without paying taxes/disclosing income in India. But, fact remains that in the instant case, the account was opened…
- Hemant M Mehta HUF vs. ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) It is clear from the above decisions that in case of bogus purchases where sales are accepted, the addition is required to be made only to the extent of difference between the GP declared by the assessee on normal purchases vis a vis bogus purchases
- Bank Of India vs. ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) In the present case, our entire focus was on whether these foreign tax credits could be allowed even when such tax credits lead to a situation in which taxes paid abroad could be refunded in India, but that must not be construed to mean that, as a corollary to our…
[…] See Avaya Global Connect vs. ACIT (1.2 MB) (ITAT Mumbai) where despite s. 50B, it was held that the gains are NOT chargeable. […]