Facts
The Respondent-Assessee, a share broking company, undertook a buyback of 28,62,500 equity shares at ₹313.40 per share during the Assessment Year 2018-19
Source reference: para 2-3During assessment proceedings under Section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act), the Assessing Officer (AO) determined the Fair Market Value (FMV) of the shares to be ₹370.46 as per Rule 11UA of the Income Tax Rules, 1962
Source reference: para 3-4The AO treated the difference of ₹57.06 per share (totaling ₹16,33,34,250/-) as income under Section 56(2)(x) of the Act, asserting that the buyback constituted an acquisition of "property" at a price lower than the FMV
Source reference: para 4-5The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] deleted the addition, holding that a buyback is a reduction of share capital rather than a purchase of a capital asset
Source reference: para 6-7The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) subsequently dismissed the Revenue’s appeal
Source reference: para 8-9The Revenue appealed to the High Court, contending that the definition of "property" under Section 56(2)(x) does not distinguish between a company’s own shares and shares of other companies
Source reference: para 11-12Issues
Whether the transaction of a company buying back its own shares under Section 68 of the Companies Act, 2013, constitutes an acquisition of "property" attracting the provisions of Section 56(2)(x) of the Income Tax Act, 1961
Source reference: para 2, 20Whether the difference between the buyback price and the Fair Market Value determined under Rule 11UA can be taxed as "Income from Other Sources" in the hands of the company
Source reference: para 3-5Law Applied
Section 56(2)(x) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which provides for the taxation of the value of property received for inadequate consideration
Source reference: para 5Section 68 of the Companies Act, 2013, which governs the power and procedure for a company to purchase its own securities
Source reference: para 23Section 68(7) of the Companies Act, which mandates that a company must "extinguish and physically destroy" shares bought back within seven days
Source reference: para 25Section 115QA of the Income Tax Act regarding tax on distributed income through buybacks
Source reference: para 21(vi)Reasoning
The Court reasoned that while "shares and securities" are included in the definition of "property" under Section 56(2)(x), a buyback is a specialized statutory process under Section 68 of the Companies Act that results in the reduction of share capital rather than the acquisition of a capital asset
Source reference: para 24, 26The Court emphasized that under Section 68(7) of the Companies Act, the company is legally obligated to extinguish and destroy the shares bought back
Source reference: para 25-26Therefore, the hypothesis that the company "acquired" an asset at a lower rate is untenable because a person cannot be taxed for a "deemed profit" from a property that vanishes or is destroyed by operation of law immediately upon acquisition
Source reference: para 27The Court held that buyback of its own shares is the "antithesis" to buying an asset; for the issuing company, the share is merely a certificate of contribution to capital, not a property it can hold in the traditional sense
Source reference: para 24, 27While the Court noted the ITAT's incidental and misplaced reliance on Section 56(2)(viia) (which applied to different circumstances), it upheld the core logic that Section 56(2)(x) cannot be triggered by a capital reduction event
Source reference: para 29-30Holding
The High Court dismissed the Revenue’s appeal, holding that Section 56(2)(x) of the Act is inapplicable to the buyback of its own shares by a company
The Court affirmed that such a transaction constitutes a reduction of capital and not an acquisition of property, as the shares are mandatorily extinguished under the Companies Act
Source reference: para 26-27Consequently, no addition on account of "deemed profit" or difference in FMV could be made in the hands of the Respondent-Assessee
Source reference: para 30Original Court PDF
Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central - Ii, New DelhivsM/S Globe Capital Market Ltd.
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in