Held that looking to the entire scheme of design under which transactions had been executed the benefit derived by this transaction could be brought to tax under section 28(iv). The acquisition of shares was merely a step in the entire adventure, which was in the nature of trade and commerce. It was a case of acquisition of properties in the garb of these transactions which had not only resulted in having these properties immediately after the acquisition of the transaction but also in future whereby exploitation of these properties would lead to income in the nature of trade and business. It was a case of valuation of stock-in-trade. The provisions of either section 56(2)(viia) or (x) deal with the situation where transaction is made for no consideration or lower consideration and someone transferring the assets to the other. This was a case where the properties were taken control of under a scheme designed to acquire the shares of a company under a pre-planned scheme with the connivance of AJL and the AICC. The transaction had resulted in benefit to the assessee in the form of huge immovable properties held by AJL making section 28(iv) applicable to the benefit derived therefrom. That since the shares had been acquired only to get control and beneficial enjoyment of the underlying immovable properties located in the prime cities of the country and the benefit did not arise in the form of shares, any reference to rule 11UA of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 was out of context and, therefore, the adjustment sought for by the assessee on that account was not irrelevant. That once the shares were not the subject matter of valuation there was no question of deduction for tax outgo at the rate of 30 per cent. or for liabilities of the company as on the valuation date or for illiquidity since the shares were unlisted. (AY. 2011-12)