ACIT., CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD vs. MADINENI SITARAMAIAH, HYDERABAD
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the assessee failed to rebut the statutory fiction under Section 2(22)(e). Subsequent repayments or adjustments do not alter the fact that dividend was received when the monies were paid by the company.
What were the facts?
The assessee, a substantial shareholder in a closely held company, received unsecured loans from it. The Assessing Officer (AO) treated these loans as 'deemed dividend' under Section 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act, considering the company's accumulated profits.
What were the issues?
Whether loans advanced by a closely held company to a substantial shareholder can be treated as 'deemed dividend' under Section 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act, and whether subsequent repayments affect this treatment.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(5)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- Smt. Tarulata Shyam v. CIT209 citing108 ITR 345 · 1977 · SC
- CIT v. Ankitech (P) Ltd.202 citing11 Taxmann.com 100 · 2012 · HC · Read judgment
- Miss P. Sarada v. CIT64 citing229 ITR 444 · 1998 · SC
- CIT v. Madhur Housing and Development Company49 citing93 Taxmann.com 502 · 2018 · SC
- 209 CTR 97 5. Puneet Bhagat Vs. ITO (157 ITD353) 6. Addl. CIT v. Shri Chandrakant V Gosalia14 citing63 Taxmann.com 97 · 2015 · HC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad ‘A’ Bench, Hyderabad
Heard together (2 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
""त रवीश सूद, जे.एम./PER RAVISH SOOD, J.M:
The present appeal filed by the
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 2(22)(e)
- Sindhu Farms Pvt Ltd, Gurugram vs DCIT, RohtakITA 8194/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2020-21
- Pranav Prakashchandra Kansara, Ahmedabad vs ITO Ward 5 3 2 Ahmedabad, Aayakar Bhavan…ITA 911/AHD/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed24 Sept 2026AY 2013-14
- Pranav Prakashchandra Kansara, Ahmedabad vs ITO Ward 5 3 2 Ahmedabad, Aayakar Bhavan…ITA 911/AHD/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed24 Sept 2026AY 2013-14
- M/S. Jsw Infrastructure Limited, Mumbai vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 6051/MUM/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed23 Sept 2026AY 2020-21
- M/S. Jsw Cement Limited, Mumbai vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 4867/MUM/2026[2021-22]Status: Disposed23 Sept 2026AY 2021-22
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- J M Mhatre Infra PVT. LTD Thr. Authorized Chetanj Mhatre vs. Union Of INDIA Thr. Secretary And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026
- J M Mhatre Infra PVT. LTD Thr. Authorized Chetan J. Mhatre vs. Union Of INDIA Thr. Secretary And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026
- Namita Behera vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Ratul Boro vs. The Union Of INDIA And 4 OrsGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- Jashwant Sharma vs. The Union Of INDIA And A4 OrsGauhati · 14 Oct 2026