Assessee-company issued equity shares at premium. For purpose of valuation of shares, assessee placed reliance on valuation report drawn by a merchant banker wherein DCF method was adopted and value of each share was pegged at Rs. 9.60. However, Assessing Officer rejected said valuation report on ground that valuation of shares was not realistic keeping in view growth and stature of company. Assessing Officer independently determined value of each share by adopting NAV method and made addition to income of assessee under section 56(2)(viib). CIT(A) and Tribunal up held the order of the Assessing Officer. On appeal the Court held that  language of rule 11UA(2) places a choice upon assessee to either follow route as prescribed in clause (a) or in alternative to place for consideration of Assessing Officer a valuation report drawn by a merchant banker as per DCF method. Therefore, it would be open for Assessing Officer, for reasons so recorded, to doubt or reject a valuation that may be submitted for its consideration, statute clearly did not appear to empower it to independently evaluate face value of unquoted equity shares by adopting a valuation method other than one chosen by assessee.  Matter is  remanded to Assessing Officer to undertake an exercise of valuation afresh in accordance with DCF method. (AY. 2014-15)