CIT v. Vadilal Lalubhai

181 ITR 1High Court1990#11243 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 132 Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 144 Section 154 Section 2(22)(e)

Judgments citing CIT v. Vadilal Lalubhai

M/S THANJAVUR COMMERECE PVT; LTD.,,NAGPUR vs. A,C.I.T CENT CIR. 1(2), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 182/NAG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur15 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Sachin V. LuthraFor Respondent: Shri Harshad S. Vengurlekar

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 154Section 2(22)(e)

…) SCC 349, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that a statutory fiction cannot be extended beyond the purpose. Similar view was taken by the apex court in the case of CIT Vs. C.P. Sarthy Mudaliar 83 ITR 170 and of kerela high Court and in the case of P.V. John 181 ITR 1. Thus, it clear that before the deeming provision of the Act is invoked, the purpose for enacting the section must be clear and borne in mind. However for invoking he provisions of section 2(22)(e) of the Act, the Department is required to establish that payment made by a company to the 5 Thanjavur Commerce Pvt. Ltd. ITA no.182/Nag./2016 share hol…

DCIT CC 3(1), MUMBAI vs. YOGESH JOGINDERNATH MEHRA, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1003/MUM/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Dec 2021AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Ms. Ritu KishorFor Respondent: Dr. Yogesh Kamat (DR)

Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 144ASection 153ASection 2(22)(e)

…emed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) are by way of journal entries and there are no actual payments made and therefore should have been excluded while making the said addition. On this contention, it is noted that the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of P.V. John (181 ITR 1) has held that the provisions of section 2(22)(e) create a legal fiction for 6 A.Y.2012-13 bringing payments of the nature of loans and advances, in the tax net as deemed dividend and therefore, it will have to be given strict construction, nevertheless, a construction so as to suppress the mischief which it sought to suppress. Similarly, the Hon'b…

EXOTICA HOUSING & INFRSTRUCTURE PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 8(4), NEW DELHI

ITA 5188/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jun 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Anil Chaturvedi

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Jagdish Singh, Sr. D.R

Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)

…deeming provision should be construed strictly and be confined and limited to the purpose for which they are created and should not be extended beyond their legitimate field as held by the Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Vadilal Lalubhai in 86 ITR 2 and 181 ITR 1 (Kerala), CIT vs. P.V. John. (iv) In the case of CIT vs. Sarathy Mudaliar in 83 ITR 170, the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 14.3.1. In the case of CIT vs. Sarathi Mudaliar in 83 ITR 170, the Hon’ble Supreme Court, while considering the provision of Section 2(6A)(e) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (which is parimateria to Section 2(22)(e) of the IT Act),…

PYRAMID REALTORS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 2057/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Singh Gautam

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)

…deeming provision should be construed strictly and be confined and limited to the purpose for which they are created and should not be extended beyond their legitimate field as held by the Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Vadilal Lalubhai in 86 ITR 2 and 181 ITR 1 (Kerala), CIT vs. P.V. John. (iv) In the case of CIT vs. Sarathy Mudaliar in 83 ITR 170, the Hon’ble Supreme Court 65 ITA.Nos.2053, 2054, 2055, 2056 & 2057/Del./2017 M/s. Saamag Developers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi & Others. 14.3.1 In the case of CIT vs. Sarathi Mudaliar in 83 ITR 170, the Hon’ble Supreme Court, while considering the provision of Sec…

SAGA DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 2056/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Singh Gautam

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)

…deeming provision should be construed strictly and be confined and limited to the purpose for which they are created and should not be extended beyond their legitimate field as held by the Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Vadilal Lalubhai in 86 ITR 2 and 181 ITR 1 (Kerala), CIT vs. P.V. John. (iv) In the case of CIT vs. Sarathy Mudaliar in 83 ITR 170, the Hon’ble Supreme Court 65 ITA.Nos.2053, 2054, 2055, 2056 & 2057/Del./2017 M/s. Saamag Developers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi & Others. 14.3.1 In the case of CIT vs. Sarathi Mudaliar in 83 ITR 170, the Hon’ble Supreme Court, while considering the provision of Sec…

SAAMAG CONSTRUCTION LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 2054/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Singh Gautam

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)

…deeming provision should be construed strictly and be confined and limited to the purpose for which they are created and should not be extended beyond their legitimate field as held by the Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Vadilal Lalubhai in 86 ITR 2 and 181 ITR 1 (Kerala), CIT vs. P.V. John. (iv) In the case of CIT vs. Sarathy Mudaliar in 83 ITR 170, the Hon’ble Supreme Court 65 ITA.Nos.2053, 2054, 2055, 2056 & 2057/Del./2017 M/s. Saamag Developers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi & Others. 14.3.1 In the case of CIT vs. Sarathi Mudaliar in 83 ITR 170, the Hon’ble Supreme Court, while considering the provision of Sec…

SAAMAG DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 2053/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Singh Gautam

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)

…deeming provision should be construed strictly and be confined and limited to the purpose for which they are created and should not be extended beyond their legitimate field as held by the Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Vadilal Lalubhai in 86 ITR 2 and 181 ITR 1 (Kerala), CIT vs. P.V. John. (iv) In the case of CIT vs. Sarathy Mudaliar in 83 ITR 170, the Hon’ble Supreme Court 65 ITA.Nos.2053, 2054, 2055, 2056 & 2057/Del./2017 M/s. Saamag Developers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi & Others. 14.3.1 In the case of CIT vs. Sarathi Mudaliar in 83 ITR 170, the Hon’ble Supreme Court, while considering the provision of Sec…

MOHAMMED AHMED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 29, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 1659/KOL/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Oct 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2007-08 Mohammed Ahmed V/S. Acit, Circle-29, 3, 10/1/1A, Topsia Road Govt. Place (West), (South), Kolkata – 700 046 Kolkata – 700 001 [Pan No.Acxpa 6297 N] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 2(2)(e)Section 2(22)Section 2(22)(e)

…company for the last many years,therefore, holding this business transactions as advance and consequently deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e) of the Act is not appropriate. Assessee has also cited case law in support of its claim as under:- a) CIT v. John 181 ITR 1 (Kar) b) CIT v. Rajkumar 318 ITR 462 (Del) c) Tarulata vs. CIT 108 ITR 345 (SC) It was also submitted that job work done by assessee for the aforesaid company was subject to TDS u/s 194C of the Act and same was duly deducted and deposited in Govt. account. However, Ld. CIT(A) disregarded the claim of assessee. Ld. CIT(A) has cited several case law…

MR. NARESH SHARMA,KARNAL vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

ITA 4945/DEL/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. A. T. Varkey, Jm & Sh. O.P.Kant, Am Ita No.4945/Del./2011 Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Naresh Sharma, Vs. Ito, 605, Sector-5, Ward-3(2), Room No.385A, Karnal C.R. Building, I.P. Estate, Pan:Alis4868F New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Sh.Rajeev Sachdeva, Ca Respondent By : Sh. P. Dam Kanunjna, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 03.09.2015 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.09.2015 Order Per O.P.Kant, A.M. This Appeal Of The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 03.08.2011 Of Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) - Vi, New Delhi, Raising Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case The Ao & The Cit (A) Erred In Law & On The Facts Holding That A Sum Of Rs.6,36,117/- Was Taxable In The Hands Of The Appellant As 'Deemed Dividend' Within The Meaning Of Section 2(22)(E) Of The It Act. 2. The Appellant Submits That Facts Stated By The Appellant & Law As Explained By The Appellant Was Not Correctly Interpreted. The Provisions Of Section 2(22)(E) Have Been Wrongly Construed & Erroneously Invoked. 3. On Facts & Circumstances Of The Case The Ao & The Cit Appeals Was Not Justified In Enhancing Rs.80,000/- On Account Of Ita No.4945/Del./2011 2

For Appellant: Sh.Rajeev Sachdeva, CAFor Respondent: Sh. P. Dam Kanunjna, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)

…y the company to the assessee fails to fulfill any one of conditions, it can‟t be held as deemed dividend. The section being a deeming provision has to be construed strictly as held in the by the Hon‟ble Kerela High Court in the case of CIT Vs. PV John (1990) 181 ITR 1. The Hon‟ble High Court of Allahabad in the case of CIT Vs. HK Mittal (1996) 219 ITR 420 has held that the chief ingredient is that one should be a share holder on the date the loan is advanced to the him and where such ingredient is not established, the advance could not be taken as deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e) of the Act. The ld. AR in…