Tally
coaching
CA Classes

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

M/s 3FIVE8 Technologies Private Limited , Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

LinkedIn


Court :
ITAT Bangalore

Brief :
The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the order dated 17-12-2018 passed by Ld CIT(A)-7, Bengaluru and it relates to the assessment year 2015-16.

Citation :
ITA No.630/Bang/2019

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
“C” BENCH : BANGALORE

BEFORE SHRI B. R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER

ITA No.630/Bang/2019
Assessment Year : 2015 – 16

M/s. 3FIVE8 Technologies Pvt. Ltd.,518, VV Arcade, 1st Main Road,AECS Layout, B Block Kundalahalli,Bengaluru – 560 037.PAN : AAACZ 3829 K
APPELLANT 

Vs.

DCIT, Circle – 7[1][1],Bengaluru
RESPONDENT

Assessee by : Shri. Suresh Muthukrishnan, CA
Revenue by : Smt. R. Premi, JCIT DR

Date of hearing : 03.11.2020
Date of Pronouncement : 03 .11.2020

O R D E R

PER B.R.Baskaran, Accountant Member:-

The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the order dated 17-12-2018 passed by Ld CIT(A)-7, Bengaluru and it relates to the assessment year 2015-16.

2. The appeal is barred by limitation by 37 days. The assessee has filed a petition requesting the bench to condone the delay. It is stated that the assessee did not file appeal immediately upon receipt of order of Ld CIT(A) under the impression that the “Start up”companies are exempted from the provisions of sec.56(2)(viib) of the Act in view of the letter dated 06-02-2018 issued by CBDT. However,when the assessee consulted his tax counsel, it came to know that the above said letter of CBDT only stays collection of demand and not cancellation of demand. Immediately thereafter, the present appeal came to be filed, which resulted in a delay of 37 days. Accordingly it is submitted that the delay has occurred on account of mistaken belief and accordingly, it is prayed that the delay may kindly be condoned.

3. We heard Ld D.R on this preliminary issue and perused the record. Having regard to the submissions made in the petition, we are of the view that there was reasonable cause for the delay in filing the appeal. Accordingly, we condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing.

4. In this appeal, the assessee is contesting the addition of Rs.74,68,746/- made by the AO u/s 56(2)(viib) of the Act, being excess share premium collected by the assessee, which was also confirmed by Ld CIT(A).

5. The Ld A.R submitted that the assessee is engaged in the business of providing services on Software technology. It has developed a software named “Apartment ADDA” which caters to the technological requirements of apartment complexes, intra-residential complex communications, facility management, accounting, visitor,staff & security management. During the year under consideration,the assessee issued 3915 equity shares having face value of Rs.10/-each at a premium of Rs.6,376/- per share. Out of the 3915 shares,2740 shares were issued to non-residents and remaining were issued to the residents. The assessee furnished a valuation report to support the share premium of Rs.6376/- per share.

To know more in details find the attachment file
 

 

Guest
on 06 November 2020
Published in Income Tax
Views : 15
downloaded 14 times
Report Abuse

LinkedIn







Trending Tags