Keval Kuman Jain v. ACIT

144 ITD 672Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2013#10416 most cited
10

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2018.

Judgments citing Keval Kuman Jain v. ACIT

SHRI SHIRISH P. SHAH,,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1),, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2211/AHD/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat14 Nov 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.M.Garg & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A. No.2211/Ahd/2015/Srt िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2009-10 Shirish P Shah, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ashoka Pavalion-A, Ward- 3(1), Surat. Opp.Kapadia Health Club, New Civil Road, Surat. [Pan: Abips 4478 F] अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Shri Hiren R.Vepari – Ar राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By Shri Dileep Kumar – Sr.Dr 12.10.2018 सुनवाई क" तारीख/ Date Of Hearing: 14.11.2018 उ"ोषणा क" तारीख/Pronouncement On आदेश /O R D E R Per O. P. Meena, Accoutant Member: 1. This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Ii, Surat(In Short “The Cit (A)”) Dated 14.05.2015 Pertaining To Assessment Year 2009-10 Which In Turn Has Arisen From The Order Passed By The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1), Surat(In Short “The Ao”) Dated 28.03.2014 Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 147 Of Income Tax Act,1961 (In Short ‘The Act’).

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

…he addition is to be sustained should be out of accumulated profit as adjusted as on the date of receipt on advance and should be to in the ration of shareholding at 16.20% as per the decision of ITAT Pune Bench in the case of Keval Kumar Jain vs. ACIT [2013] 144 ITD 672/37 taxmann.com 248 (Pune Tribunal) (PB, Page 138). Accordingly to which the assessee has filed and working of accumulated profit at Rs.73,37,078/- and current years profit at Rs.3,84,110/-. Accordingly, as per shareholding of 16.20% the accumulated profit has been worked out at Rs.4,19,232/- in which a sum of Rs.1,85,000/- is required to be added…

SHRI AMITKUMAR MATHURDAS KANERIA,,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -1(3),, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 2663/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat16 Aug 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.M.Garg & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No’S.2031 & 2663/Ahd/2015/Srt िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2011-12 Amitkumar Mathurdas Kaneria, Vs The Income Tax Officer, 64, Himgiri Bunglows, . Ward-3(3), Surat. Near: Rajhans Cinema, Piplod, Dumas Road, Surat – 395 007. [Pan: Adppk 7315 J) अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No’S.1545 & 2029/Ahd/2015/Srt िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2011-12 Smt.Jayaben Mathurdas Kaneria, Vs The Income Tax Officer, 64, Himgiri Bunglows, . Ward-3(3), Surat. Near: Rajhans Cinema, Piplod, Dumas Road, Surat – 395 007. [Pan: Adppk 7316 M) अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.2030/Ahd/2015/Srt िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2010-11 Smt.Jullie Amit Kaneria, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 64, Himgiri Bunglows, Ward-3(3), Surat. Near: Rajhans Cinema, Piplod, Dumas Road, Surat – 395 007. [Pan: Aizpk 3199 B) अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 144

…prejudice that the CIT(A) ought to have further restricted the addition in respect of deemed dividend u/s.2(22)(e) of the Act to the extent of shareholding of the appellant by following the decision of Pune Bench ITAT in the case of Keval Kuman Jain vs. ACIT, 144 ITD 672. 34. Brief facts are that, the AO, on perusal of the copy of account from the books of Rahul Textiles Industries Pvt. Ltd. noticed that there was a credit balance of Rs.15,33,739/- as on Amit Kumar Kaneria & Others /I.T.A. No’s.2031, 2663, 1545, 2029 & 2030/Ahd/2015/SRT/A.Y:2010-11 & 11-12 Page 26 of 37 01.04.2009 but during the year, as a resul…

SHRI AMITKUMAR MATHURDAS KANERIA,,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -3(3),, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 2031/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat16 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.M.Garg & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No’S.2031 & 2663/Ahd/2015/Srt िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2011-12 Amitkumar Mathurdas Kaneria, Vs The Income Tax Officer, 64, Himgiri Bunglows, . Ward-3(3), Surat. Near: Rajhans Cinema, Piplod, Dumas Road, Surat – 395 007. [Pan: Adppk 7315 J) अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No’S.1545 & 2029/Ahd/2015/Srt िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2011-12 Smt.Jayaben Mathurdas Kaneria, Vs The Income Tax Officer, 64, Himgiri Bunglows, . Ward-3(3), Surat. Near: Rajhans Cinema, Piplod, Dumas Road, Surat – 395 007. [Pan: Adppk 7316 M) अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.2030/Ahd/2015/Srt िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2010-11 Smt.Jullie Amit Kaneria, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 64, Himgiri Bunglows, Ward-3(3), Surat. Near: Rajhans Cinema, Piplod, Dumas Road, Surat – 395 007. [Pan: Aizpk 3199 B) अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 144

…prejudice that the CIT(A) ought to have further restricted the addition in respect of deemed dividend u/s.2(22)(e) of the Act to the extent of shareholding of the appellant by following the decision of Pune Bench ITAT in the case of Keval Kuman Jain vs. ACIT, 144 ITD 672. 34. Brief facts are that, the AO, on perusal of the copy of account from the books of Rahul Textiles Industries Pvt. Ltd. noticed that there was a credit balance of Rs.15,33,739/- as on Amit Kumar Kaneria & Others /I.T.A. No’s.2031, 2663, 1545, 2029 & 2030/Ahd/2015/SRT/A.Y:2010-11 & 11-12 Page 26 of 37 01.04.2009 but during the year, as a resul…

SMT. JULLIE AMIT KANERIA,,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -3(3),, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 2030/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat16 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.M.Garg & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No’S.2031 & 2663/Ahd/2015/Srt िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2011-12 Amitkumar Mathurdas Kaneria, Vs The Income Tax Officer, 64, Himgiri Bunglows, . Ward-3(3), Surat. Near: Rajhans Cinema, Piplod, Dumas Road, Surat – 395 007. [Pan: Adppk 7315 J) अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No’S.1545 & 2029/Ahd/2015/Srt िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2011-12 Smt.Jayaben Mathurdas Kaneria, Vs The Income Tax Officer, 64, Himgiri Bunglows, . Ward-3(3), Surat. Near: Rajhans Cinema, Piplod, Dumas Road, Surat – 395 007. [Pan: Adppk 7316 M) अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.2030/Ahd/2015/Srt िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2010-11 Smt.Jullie Amit Kaneria, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 64, Himgiri Bunglows, Ward-3(3), Surat. Near: Rajhans Cinema, Piplod, Dumas Road, Surat – 395 007. [Pan: Aizpk 3199 B) अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 144

…prejudice that the CIT(A) ought to have further restricted the addition in respect of deemed dividend u/s.2(22)(e) of the Act to the extent of shareholding of the appellant by following the decision of Pune Bench ITAT in the case of Keval Kuman Jain vs. ACIT, 144 ITD 672. 34. Brief facts are that, the AO, on perusal of the copy of account from the books of Rahul Textiles Industries Pvt. Ltd. noticed that there was a credit balance of Rs.15,33,739/- as on Amit Kumar Kaneria & Others /I.T.A. No’s.2031, 2663, 1545, 2029 & 2030/Ahd/2015/SRT/A.Y:2010-11 & 11-12 Page 26 of 37 01.04.2009 but during the year, as a resul…

SMT. JAYABEN MATHURDAS KANERIA,,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -1(3),, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 2029/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat16 Aug 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.M.Garg & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No’S.2031 & 2663/Ahd/2015/Srt िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2011-12 Amitkumar Mathurdas Kaneria, Vs The Income Tax Officer, 64, Himgiri Bunglows, . Ward-3(3), Surat. Near: Rajhans Cinema, Piplod, Dumas Road, Surat – 395 007. [Pan: Adppk 7315 J) अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No’S.1545 & 2029/Ahd/2015/Srt िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2011-12 Smt.Jayaben Mathurdas Kaneria, Vs The Income Tax Officer, 64, Himgiri Bunglows, . Ward-3(3), Surat. Near: Rajhans Cinema, Piplod, Dumas Road, Surat – 395 007. [Pan: Adppk 7316 M) अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.2030/Ahd/2015/Srt िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2010-11 Smt.Jullie Amit Kaneria, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 64, Himgiri Bunglows, Ward-3(3), Surat. Near: Rajhans Cinema, Piplod, Dumas Road, Surat – 395 007. [Pan: Aizpk 3199 B) अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 144

…prejudice that the CIT(A) ought to have further restricted the addition in respect of deemed dividend u/s.2(22)(e) of the Act to the extent of shareholding of the appellant by following the decision of Pune Bench ITAT in the case of Keval Kuman Jain vs. ACIT, 144 ITD 672. 34. Brief facts are that, the AO, on perusal of the copy of account from the books of Rahul Textiles Industries Pvt. Ltd. noticed that there was a credit balance of Rs.15,33,739/- as on Amit Kumar Kaneria & Others /I.T.A. No’s.2031, 2663, 1545, 2029 & 2030/Ahd/2015/SRT/A.Y:2010-11 & 11-12 Page 26 of 37 01.04.2009 but during the year, as a resul…

SMT. JAYABEN MATHURDAS KANERIA,,SURAT vs. THE THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -1(3),, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 1545/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat16 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.M.Garg & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No’S.2031 & 2663/Ahd/2015/Srt िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2011-12 Amitkumar Mathurdas Kaneria, Vs The Income Tax Officer, 64, Himgiri Bunglows, . Ward-3(3), Surat. Near: Rajhans Cinema, Piplod, Dumas Road, Surat – 395 007. [Pan: Adppk 7315 J) अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No’S.1545 & 2029/Ahd/2015/Srt िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2011-12 Smt.Jayaben Mathurdas Kaneria, Vs The Income Tax Officer, 64, Himgiri Bunglows, . Ward-3(3), Surat. Near: Rajhans Cinema, Piplod, Dumas Road, Surat – 395 007. [Pan: Adppk 7316 M) अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.2030/Ahd/2015/Srt िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2010-11 Smt.Jullie Amit Kaneria, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 64, Himgiri Bunglows, Ward-3(3), Surat. Near: Rajhans Cinema, Piplod, Dumas Road, Surat – 395 007. [Pan: Aizpk 3199 B) अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 144

…prejudice that the CIT(A) ought to have further restricted the addition in respect of deemed dividend u/s.2(22)(e) of the Act to the extent of shareholding of the appellant by following the decision of Pune Bench ITAT in the case of Keval Kuman Jain vs. ACIT, 144 ITD 672. 34. Brief facts are that, the AO, on perusal of the copy of account from the books of Rahul Textiles Industries Pvt. Ltd. noticed that there was a credit balance of Rs.15,33,739/- as on Amit Kumar Kaneria & Others /I.T.A. No’s.2031, 2663, 1545, 2029 & 2030/Ahd/2015/SRT/A.Y:2010-11 & 11-12 Page 26 of 37 01.04.2009 but during the year, as a resul…

SUMITOMO CHEMICAL INDIA P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 1(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2008-

ITA 6595/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Apr 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/S Sumitomo Chemical India The Deputy Commissioner Of Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax- 1(3)(1), 6Th Floor, Moti Mahal, 195, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road, J Tata Road, Churchgate, Vs. Churchgate, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aaecs3750L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Paras Savla &For Respondent: Shri Saurabh Deshpande (Sr. DR CIT)
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 249Section 263

…nts/decisions in order to substantiate its contention. i) Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC) ii) M/s Lahoti Overseas Ltd. vs DCIT, ITA No. 3786/Mum/2012, Order dt. 18- 03-2016 (ITAT). iii) Kewalkumar Jain vs ACIT (2013) 144 ITD 672 (Pune) (ITAT) iv) Mr. Kunal S. Surana vs. ITO, ITA No. 1522 of 2013 (Bom HC) order dt. 16- 06-2015 v) Anant B. Shinde (HUF) vs. ITO, ITA (Lodg) 1732 of 2013 (Bom HC) order dt. 04-12-2013 vi)Vijay Vishin Vibhag vs DCIT, ITA No. 498 of 2015, (Bom HC) order dt. 19-09- 2017 5 Assessment Year: 2008-09 vi) Sakar Patel Vibhag Jungle Kamdard Sahakari…

ACIT CEN CIR 29, MUMBAI vs. VIJAYDEEP HOTELS P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 3291/MUM/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं /I.Ta Nos. 3291,3293,3384 & 3385/Mum/11 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2004-05 To 2007-08 The Acit, M/S. Vijaydeep Hotels Pvt. बनाम/ Cent. Cir-29, Ltd., Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Hotel Bawa International, Mumbai-400 020 Nehru Road Ext, Near Domestic Airport, Vile Parle, Mumbai-400 049 आयकर अपील सं /I.Ta Nos. 3241 & 3243/Mum/11 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2006-07 & 2007-08 M/S. Vijaydeep Hotels Pvt. The Acit, बनाम/ Ltd., Cent. Cir-29, Vs. Hotel Bawa International, Aayakar Bhavan, Nehru Road Ext, Mumbai-400 020 Near Domestic Airport, Vile Parle, Mumbai-400 049 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacv 1582D आयकर अपील सं /I.Ta Nos. 951 To 953/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2005-06 To 2007-08 Shri Karanveer Singh G. The Acit, बनाम/ Bawa, Cent. Cir-29, Vs. 22, Sahib Guru Angad Aayakar Bhavan, Niwas, Mumbai-400 020 Vitthal Nagar Co. Op. Soc. N.S. Road No. 22, Jvpd Scheme, Juhu, Vile Parle (E), Mumbai-400 049 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aejpb 8856F

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri G.M. Dass
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 37(1)

…s. 2(22)(e), addition has to be restricted to such percentage of ‘accumulated profits’ as corresponds to assessee’s shareholding in company in question. Reliance was placed on the decision of Pune Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Kewal Kumar Jain Vs ACIT (144 ITD 672). The 25 Vijaydeep Hotels shareholding of his client is 49.5%. It is also the contention of the assessee that opening balance is to be kept out of the purview of Sec. 2(22)(e) of the Act and for this proposition reliance was placed on the decision of the Pune Bench of Tribunal in the very same case of Kewal Kumar Jain (supra). 40. The Ld. Depar…

VIJAYDEEP HOTELS P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 29, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 3241/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं /I.Ta Nos. 3291,3293,3384 & 3385/Mum/11 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2004-05 To 2007-08 The Acit, M/S. Vijaydeep Hotels Pvt. बनाम/ Cent. Cir-29, Ltd., Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Hotel Bawa International, Mumbai-400 020 Nehru Road Ext, Near Domestic Airport, Vile Parle, Mumbai-400 049 आयकर अपील सं /I.Ta Nos. 3241 & 3243/Mum/11 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2006-07 & 2007-08 M/S. Vijaydeep Hotels Pvt. The Acit, बनाम/ Ltd., Cent. Cir-29, Vs. Hotel Bawa International, Aayakar Bhavan, Nehru Road Ext, Mumbai-400 020 Near Domestic Airport, Vile Parle, Mumbai-400 049 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacv 1582D आयकर अपील सं /I.Ta Nos. 951 To 953/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2005-06 To 2007-08 Shri Karanveer Singh G. The Acit, बनाम/ Bawa, Cent. Cir-29, Vs. 22, Sahib Guru Angad Aayakar Bhavan, Niwas, Mumbai-400 020 Vitthal Nagar Co. Op. Soc. N.S. Road No. 22, Jvpd Scheme, Juhu, Vile Parle (E), Mumbai-400 049 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aejpb 8856F

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri G.M. Dass
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 37(1)

…s. 2(22)(e), addition has to be restricted to such percentage of ‘accumulated profits’ as corresponds to assessee’s shareholding in company in question. Reliance was placed on the decision of Pune Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Kewal Kumar Jain Vs ACIT (144 ITD 672). The 25 Vijaydeep Hotels shareholding of his client is 49.5%. It is also the contention of the assessee that opening balance is to be kept out of the purview of Sec. 2(22)(e) of the Act and for this proposition reliance was placed on the decision of the Pune Bench of Tribunal in the very same case of Kewal Kumar Jain (supra). 40. The Ld. Depar…

SHRINIVASA A. PAWAR,MUMBAI vs. ACIT ., RANGE-7(2), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 6148/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Oct 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.6148/Mum/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2007-08 A N D आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.3746/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2008-09 Mr. Shrinivas A. Pawar, The Acit, Range 7(2), बनाम/ 53, Dutta Bhavan, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Vijay Manjrekar Lane, Mumbai-400 020 Gokhale Road (North), Dadar (W), Mumbai-400 028 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. :Afwpp 3313A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) Shri Pankaj R. Toprani अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By: ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri G.M. Makwana

For Respondent: Shri G.M. Makwana
Section 2(22)(e)

…16. Ground No. 2 relates to the addition on account of deemed dividend u/s. 2(22)(e) of the Act. 16.1. At the very outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee drew our attention to the decision of the Tribunal Pune Bench in the case of Kewalkumar Jain Vs ACIT 144 ITD 672. It is the say of the Ld. Counsel that loans/advances given in earlier years which have been assessed as deemed dividend should be reduced from the surplus while determining the accumulated profit. 17. We have carefully gone through the decision of the Tribunal Pune Bench (supra). We find that the Tribunal at para-17 of its order has accepted th…