Capital Gain

Additional evidence — Admissibility of additional evidence by CIT(A) does not give rise to any substantial question of law, if the CIT(A) or the Tribunal had not acted on any wrong principle.

The terms of a contract between the parties could be changed, altered, modified and even rescinded by further mutual agreements in view s 62 of the Contract Act. Considering that the value of shares of IT companies had suffered substantially, even by giving additional security of shares, it was a prudent act on the part of the assessee to ensure liquidation of the entire liability along with the interest which had accrued thereupon.

 

Further, the admissibility of additional evidence by the CIT(A) would not give rise to any substantial question of law, provided the CIT(A) or the Tribunal had not acted on any wrong principle, it was within the discretion of the CIT(A) to admit the additional evidence. The discretion had not been exercised improperly or against the provisions of law.

Long-term capital gains — Addition made to the income of the on account of long-term capital gain on the ground that the assessee has pledged additional shares as security with the lenders against loan after the novation of contract is unsustainable — as held by DelHC in CIT v Betterways Finance Leasing Pvt. Ltd. — In favour of: The Assessee ; ITA No. 995/2009

Decided on: 24 May 2011