The  assessee issued shares at premium  valuation determined was   on basis of discounted cash flow (DCF) method. The  Assessing Officer rejected DCF method on ground that there was huge difference in projected and actual financials for relevant period considered by assessee for adopting DCF method and changed valuation method to NAV and treated excess amount received by assessee as share premium as income under section 56(2)(viib) of the Act. CIT(A) affirmed the order of the Assessing Officer. On appeal the Tribunal  held that the  assessee had justified premium charged with help of valuation report.  Assessee had explained difference between projected operating profits and actual financials for financial year 2014-15 to financial year 2018-19. There was a minor difference in projected financials and actual financials. Addition is deleted. (AY. 2015-16 )