{"id":52892,"date":"2025-04-15T21:20:58","date_gmt":"2025-04-15T15:50:58","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/sls-energy-p-ltd-v-ito-2024-470-itr-153-2023-154-taxmann-com-400-bom-hc\/"},"modified":"2025-04-15T21:20:58","modified_gmt":"2025-04-15T15:50:58","slug":"sls-energy-p-ltd-v-ito-2024-470-itr-153-2023-154-taxmann-com-400-bom-hc","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/sls-energy-p-ltd-v-ito-2024-470-itr-153-2023-154-taxmann-com-400-bom-hc\/","title":{"rendered":"SLS Energy (P.) Ltd. v. ITO (2024) 470 ITR 153 \/(2023) 154 taxmann.com 400 (Bom) (HC)"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>During relevant assessment year, the\u00a0 assessee-company raised capital by issuing\u00a0 optionally Convertible Preference Shares with face value of Re. 1 at a premium of Rs. 999 to company\u00a0 which was its sister concern.\u00a0 Assessment was made under section 143(1).\u00a0 Assessing Officer reopened assessment on ground that based upon analysis of details and information of balance sheet, share premium charged was not justified on basis of &#8216;intrinsic valuation of shares and Net Asset Value Method and to that extent income had escaped assessment Since\u00a0 the Assessing Officer had not doubted\u00a0 regarding transaction having taken place between said two companies with regard to allotment of preference shares and receipt of share premium amount and assessment in case of company\u00a0 had become final, there was neither any basis for Assessing Officer for his reason to believe that income had escaped assessment nor was there any tangible material which would have otherwise given jurisdiction to reopen assessment even when reopening was sought to be made within a period of four years.Reassessment notice is\u00a0 quashed. (AY. 2010-11, 2011-12)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>S. 147: Reassessment-Within four years-Cash credit-Share premium-No tangible material-Reassessment is bad in law.[S.2(24)(xvi), 56(2)(viib), 68,  143(1), Art. 226]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-52892","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-dL6","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/52892","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=52892"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/52892\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":52893,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/52892\/revisions\/52893"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=52892"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=52892"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=52892"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}