← Back to search

MOHAN EXPORT (INDIA) PVT LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-17(2), DELHI

PDF
ITA 1716/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 December 20253 pages

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘G’, NEW DELHI

Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Manish Agarwal

For Appellant: None
For Respondent: Sh. Mahesh Kumar, CIT-DR
Hearing: 15.12.2025Pronounced: 15.12.2025

Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:

This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2017-18, arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No.
ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1073230960(1) dated
13.02.2025, in proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest.
It is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.

3.

The assessee pleads the following substantive grounds in the instant appeal:

“i) That the ld. CIT(A) has erred in facts and in law in confirming the addition of Rs.5,57,96,604/- under the provisions of section 2(22)(e) and further enhancing the Mohan Export (India) Pvt. Ltd.

2
addition by Rs.9,85,07,883/- to Rs.15,43,04,487/-. That the addition being contrary to provisions of law be deleted.

ii) That it may be held that the provisions of section 2(22)(e) have been wrongly applied as the assessee does not hold 10% shares or more in the company giving the loan and the addition of Rs.15,43,04,487/- being unwarranted and unjustified be deleted.”

4.

Learned CIT-DR vehemently argues that both the lower authorities herein have rightly invoked section 2(22)(e) deemed dividend addition in the assessee’s case involving the sum in question of Rs.5,57,96,604/- in their respective findings. He could hardly dispute the clinching fact that this assessee and M/s Mohan Energy Corporation (P) Ltd. have common shareholders Sh. Mohand Puri and Smt. Neeru Puri than the appellant itself having a stake therein; as the case may be.

5.

Faced with this situation and in light of the fact that the assessee does not satisfy the statutory criteria of being a registered or a beneficial shareholder u/s 2(22)(e) of the Act, we hereby quote ACIT Vs. Bhaumik Color Labs Pvt. Ltd. 118 ITD 1 (Mumbai) (SB) and CIT Vs. Ankitech (P) Ltd. (2011) 340 ITR 14 (Del.) to conclude that the impugned dividend addition is not sustainable in it’s hands. The same stands deleted in very terms therefore. Mohan Export (India) Pvt. Ltd.

3
6. This assessee’s appeal is allowed.
Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 15/12/2025. (Manish Agarwal) (Satbeer Singh Godara)
Accountant Member Judicial Member
Dated: 15/12/2025
*Subodh Kumar, Sr. PS*

MOHAN EXPORT (INDIA) PVT LTD,DELHI vs DCIT,CIRCLE-17(2), DELHI | BharatTax