National Travel Services v. CIT

401 ITR 154Supreme Court of India2018#3752 most cited

What is National Travel Services v. CIT authority for?

The Supreme Court refers the issue of whether a shareholder must be both registered and beneficial for reconsideration by a larger bench.

32

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2025.

Also referred to as

National Travel Services v. CIT · SC · 2018 · shareholder registered beneficial · section 2(22)(e) · deemed dividend · accumulated profits · closely held company

Also reported as

89 Taxmann.com 332

Sections most often in play

Section 2(22)(e)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 35DDA
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

accumulated profitsclosely held companysection 2(22)deemed dividendsection 2(22)(e)section 47beneficial ownerdirect tax vivad se vishwasliable to taxescapement of incomesection 56vivad se vishwas

Judgments citing National Travel Services v. CIT

Srinivasa Machine Works, Chennai vs. ITO, Chennai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for the assessment year

ITA 3434/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Oct 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.1969 & 3434/Chny/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13) Vs The Income Tax Officer, M/S. Srinivasa Machine Works, No.1A, Regency Apartments, No.5, Non-Corporate Ward 3(3), 1St Lane, Nungambakkam High Chennai. Road, Chennai – 600 034. Pan: Aaqfs2166M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.844/Chny/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Vs The Income Tax Officer, M/S. Srinivasa Machine Works, No.1A, Regency Apartments, No.5, Non-Corporate Ward 3(4), 1St Lane, Nungambakkam High Chennai. Road, Chennai – 600 034. Pan: Aaqfs2166M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri T. Banusekar, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar, Jcit

For Appellant: Shri T. Banusekar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar, JCIT
Section 2(22)(e)Section 80G

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘सी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी धु"ु" आर.एल रे"ी, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.1969 & 3434/CHNY/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13) Vs The Income Tax Officer, M/s. Srinivasa Machine Works, No.1A, Regency Apartments, No.5, Non-Corporate Ward 3(3), 1st Lane, Nungambakkam High Chennai. Road, Chennai – 600 034. PAN: AAQFS2166M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.844/CHNY/2017 (…

Srinivasa Machine Works, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for the assessment year

ITA 1969/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Oct 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.1969 & 3434/Chny/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13) Vs The Income Tax Officer, M/S. Srinivasa Machine Works, No.1A, Regency Apartments, No.5, Non-Corporate Ward 3(3), 1St Lane, Nungambakkam High Chennai. Road, Chennai – 600 034. Pan: Aaqfs2166M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.844/Chny/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Vs The Income Tax Officer, M/S. Srinivasa Machine Works, No.1A, Regency Apartments, No.5, Non-Corporate Ward 3(4), 1St Lane, Nungambakkam High Chennai. Road, Chennai – 600 034. Pan: Aaqfs2166M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri T. Banusekar, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar, Jcit

For Appellant: Shri T. Banusekar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar, JCIT
Section 2(22)(e)Section 80G

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘सी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी धु"ु" आर.एल रे"ी, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.1969 & 3434/CHNY/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13) Vs The Income Tax Officer, M/s. Srinivasa Machine Works, No.1A, Regency Apartments, No.5, Non-Corporate Ward 3(3), 1st Lane, Nungambakkam High Chennai. Road, Chennai – 600 034. PAN: AAQFS2166M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.844/CHNY/2017 (…

DCIT 8(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Simplex Renewable Resources P.Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 751/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Aug 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.751/Mum/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2012-13) Dcit-8(2)(1) M/S. Simplex Renewable Resources Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ 2Nd Floor, Simplex Mills Compound Room No.624 M.K. Road 30, Keshavrao Khadye Marg Vs. Mumbai-400 020. Sant Gadge Maharaj Chowk, Mumbai-400 011. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaocs-1660-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : & C.O. No.112/Mum/2018 Arising Out Of Ita No.751/Mum/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2012-13) M/S. Simplex Renewable Resources Pvt. Ltd. Dcit-8(2)(1) बनाम/ 2Nd Floor, Simplex Mills Compound Room No.624 30, Keshavrao Khadye Marg M.K. Road Vs. Sant Gadge Maharaj Chowk, Mumbai-400 011. Mumbai-400 020. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaocs-1660-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant/C.O.) (""यथ" / Respondent) : Revenue By : Chaudhury Arun Kumar, Ld. Dr Assessee By : Shri Anil Lohia, Ld. Ar Date Of Hearing : 08/07/2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 09.08.2019 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (): - 1.1 As Per The Provisions Of Section 2(22)(E) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [In Short ‘Act’], Dividend Includes Any Payment Of Any Sum, By A Company

For Appellant: Shri Anil Lohia, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Chaudhury Arun Kumar, Ld. DR
Section 2(22)(e)

…. Nothing on record suggest that the aforesaid decision is not applicable to the facts of the present case. 4. The revenue, during the course of hearing, has placed on record the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court rendered in National Travel Services V/s CIT [89 Taxmann.com 332] & Gopal & Sons HUF V/s CIT [77 Taxmann.com 71] to submit that the provisions of Section 2(22)(e) has rightly been invoked on given factual matrix. However, we find that both the decisions are distinguishable on facts which is evident from the orders of this Tribunal rendered in Neha Home Builders Pvt. Ltd. V/s DCIT [98 Simplex Renewable…

Hancraft Expo Designs P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-11(1), New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1333/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jun 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 2(22)(e)Section 234B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘C’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G. D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 1333/DEL/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Hancraft Expo Designs P Ltd. Vs DCIT (E) 302-302, Bhikaji Cama Bhawan Circle-11(1) 3rd Floor New Delhi Bhikaji Cama Place New Delhi 110 066 PAN: AABCH1215Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Ashutosh Jain, CA & Sh. Udayan Garg, CA Respondent by Sh. Amit Katoch, Sr.D.R. Date of Hearing 04.06.2019 Date of Pronouncement 07.06.2019 ORDER PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JM This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order…

M/S. Kumarpur Agro Poultries Ltd., Paschim Medinupur vs. ACIT, Circle - 38, Midnapore, Paschim Medinupur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1460/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi) Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Kumarpur Agro Poultries Ltd................................................................……………….…......Appellant Vill:- Kumarpur P.O.-Panchkuri Paschim Medinipur [Pan : Aacck7547 B] Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-38, Midnapore……............……….…....Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(22)(e)Section 250

…CIT v. Madhur Housing & Development Company reported in 401 ITR 152 (SC). 6. The ld. D/R, on the other hand, opposed the contentions of the assessee and relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of National Travel Service vs. CIT (2018) 401 ITR 154, and submitted that, to attract Section 2(22)(e) of the Act, a shareholder has only to be a person who is the beneficial owner of the shares and 3 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s. Kumarpur Agro Poultries Ltd need not necessarily be a registered shareholder. Hence the issue should be referred to the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India for constituting a…

ACIT, Chennai vs. M/S. Subhavarsha Infotech, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of assessee stands dismissed whereas that of Revenue is allowed

ITA 2805/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Dec 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

For Appellant: Shri. M. Karunakaran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Addl.CIT
Section 2(22)Section 2(22)(e)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ’सी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘C’ BENCH : CHENNAI "ी अ"ाहम पी. जॉज", लेखा सद"य एवं "ी धु"वु" आर.एल रे"डी, "या"यक सद"य के सम" । [BEFORE SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2365/CHNY/2016. "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment year : 2012-2013. M/s. Subhavarsha Infotech, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of 72/2, Sree Bagya Homes, Income Tax, Gajpathy Street, Non Corporate Circle 10(1) Shenoy Nagar, Chennai. Chennai 600 030. आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2805/CHNY/2016. "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment year : 2012-13. The Ass…

Subhavarsha Infotech, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of assessee stands dismissed whereas that of Revenue is allowed

ITA 2365/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Dec 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

For Appellant: Shri. M. Karunakaran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Addl.CIT
Section 2(22)Section 2(22)(e)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ’सी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘C’ BENCH : CHENNAI "ी अ"ाहम पी. जॉज", लेखा सद"य एवं "ी धु"वु" आर.एल रे"डी, "या"यक सद"य के सम" । [BEFORE SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2365/CHNY/2016. "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment year : 2012-2013. M/s. Subhavarsha Infotech, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of 72/2, Sree Bagya Homes, Income Tax, Gajpathy Street, Non Corporate Circle 10(1) Shenoy Nagar, Chennai. Chennai 600 030. आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2805/CHNY/2016. "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment year : 2012-13. The Ass…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Corporate Circle 1 (2), Chennai vs. M/S Checkpoint Apparel Labelling Solutions India Pvt Ltd, Chengalpet

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 429/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Nov 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. No. 429/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2013-14 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S. Checkpoint Apparel Labelling Corporate Circle -1(2), Vs. Solutions India Pvt. Ltd., Chennai – 600 034. No. Aid / Aie, Industrial Complex, Anna Salai, Maraimalai Nagar, Chengalpet – 603 209. [Pan: Aagcs 9485A] ("#यथ%/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant)

For Appellant: Shri. Vishal Kalra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. D. Rohini, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)

…ITR 14 (Delhi HC) and observed that the High Court has laid down the correct construction of deemed dividend under the Act. 2.11 Further, it is pertinent to note that the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs National Travel Services [2018] 401 ITR 154 (SC), has merely referred only one aspect of Ankitech (supra) judgement, ie, whether the shareholder in the hands of whom the deemed dividend could be taxed should be both registered and the beneficial shareholder, to a larger Bench, as was amended by Finance Act, 1987, wef 1.4.1988. The observations made therein are reasons that their lordships…

ACIT - 16(1), Mumbai vs. Cine Studios, Mumbai

ITA 2794/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajendra, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Acit-16(1), M/S Cine Studios Room. No. 439, Shree Sound Complex, बिधम/ Aayakar Bhavan, Madhav Das Pasta Road, M.K. Road, Vs. Dadar (E) Mumbai-20 Mumbai-400014 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aaafc2778B (अऩीराथी /Revenue) (प्रत्मथी / Assessee) :

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Mittal, D.R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)

…P a g e | 1 ITA No.2794/Mum/2016 A.Y 2011-12 ACIT-16(1) M/s Cine Studios Shree Sound Complex IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJENDRA, AM AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JM ACIT-16(1), M/s Cine Studios Room. No. 439, Shree Sound Complex, बिधम/ Aayakar Bhavan, Madhav Das Pasta Road, M.K. Road, Vs. Dadar (E) Mumbai-20 Mumbai-400014 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ PAN No. AAAFC2778B (अऩीराथी /Revenue) (प्रत्मथी / Assessee) : अऩीराथी की ओय से / Revenue by : Shri Rajat Mittal, D.R प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Assessee by : Shri Mehul Shah, A.R सुनवाई की तायीख / : 08.05.2018 Date of Hearing घोषणा की…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. M/S. Rajmal Lakhichand

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 832/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Feb 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Sunil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 2(22)(e)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 40A(2)(a)

…al shareholder of group companies and is amenable to provisions of section 2(22)(e) of the Act. Our view is further supported by the judgment of Hon‟ble Supreme Court of India in the case of National Travel Services Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax reported as 401 ITR 154. Referring to Explanation 3 inserted by the Finance Act, 1987 w.e.f. 01-04-1988 the Hon‟ble Apex Court held : “18) This being the case, we are of the view that the whole object of the amended provision would be stultified if the Division Bench judgment were to be followed. Ankitech’s case, in stating that no change was made by introducing the de…

M/S. Rajmal Lakhichand vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 670/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Feb 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Sunil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 2(22)(e)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 40A(2)(a)

…al shareholder of group companies and is amenable to provisions of section 2(22)(e) of the Act. Our view is further supported by the judgment of Hon‟ble Supreme Court of India in the case of National Travel Services Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax reported as 401 ITR 154. Referring to Explanation 3 inserted by the Finance Act, 1987 w.e.f. 01-04-1988 the Hon‟ble Apex Court held : “18) This being the case, we are of the view that the whole object of the amended provision would be stultified if the Division Bench judgment were to be followed. Ankitech’s case, in stating that no change was made by introducing the de…

Apurva Developers P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 9(1)1, Mumbai

ITA 7765/MUM/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Feb 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2005-06 & Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/S Apurva Developers Pvt. Ito-9(1)(1), Ltd. Room No. 266, 2Nd Vs. 9, Matru Madhur Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Apartments, 56, T.P.S. Road, Mumbai-400020 Borivali West, Mumbai-400092 Pan No. Aaaca8270F Appellant Respondent Assesseeby : Mr. Gautam S. Thaker, Ar Revenue By : Mr. T.A. Khan, Dr Date Of Hearing : 27/12/2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 09/02/2018

For Appellant: Mr. Gautam S. Thaker, ARFor Respondent: Mr. T.A. Khan, DR
Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “A” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2005-06 & Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/s Apurva Developers Pvt. ITO-9(1)(1), Ltd. Room No. 266, 2nd Vs. 9, Matru Madhur floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Apartments, 56, T.P.S. Road, Mumbai-400020 Borivali West, Mumbai-400092 PAN No. AAACA8270F Appellant Respondent Assesseeby : Mr. Gautam S. Thaker, AR Revenue by : Mr. T.A. Khan, DR Date of Hearing : 27/12/2017 Date of pronouncement : 09/02/2018 ORDER PER N.K. PRADHAN, AM The captioned appeals filed by the asse…