Pradip Kumar Malhotra v. CIT

338 ITR 538High Court2011#651 most cited

What is Pradip Kumar Malhotra v. CIT authority for?

Section 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act, which addresses deemed dividends, does not apply to loans or advances provided by a company to its shareholders if these transactions occur in the normal course of business, are driven by business expediency, or are made in consideration of a benefit conferred upon the company by the shareholder. Conversely, gratuitous loans or advances given to shareholders fall within the purview of this section.

152

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Pradip Kumar Malhotra v. CIT · Section 2(22)(e) · deemed dividend · loans and advances to shareholders · gratuitous loans · business expediency · commercial transactions · normal course of business · current account transactions · advance for company benefit

Also reported as

15 Taxmann.com 66

Sections most often in play

Section 2(22)(e)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 142(1)Section 68Section 10Section 10(2A)Section 115JB

Issues it is cited on

accumulated profitssection 142adeemed dividendsection 2(22)section 2(22)(e)section 150surrender of incomemat creditbeneficial ownersection 158bdbusiness expediencysection 80ic

Judgments citing Pradip Kumar Malhotra v. CIT

DCIT, Bangalore vs. Shri. Sumir J Hinduja, Bangalore

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue and COs filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1374/BANG/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Jul 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2006-07 Shri Jagadish N. Hinduja Deputy Commissioner Of Income- No.7 & 12, Industrial Suburb Tax Tumkur Road Vs. Circle 11(3) Yeshwanthpur Bangalore Bangalore 560 022 Pan No.Aacph7291Q Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2006-07 Shri Sumir J. Hinduja Deputy Commissioner Of Income- No.7 & 12, Industrial Suburb Tax Tumkur Road Vs. Circle 11(3) Yeshwanthpur Bangalore Bangalore 560 022 Pan No.Aaeph5197H Appellant Respondent C.O. No.48/Bang/2013 (Arising Out Of Ita No.1373/Bang/2012) Assessment Year: 2006-07 Shri Jagadish N. Hinduja Vs. Dcit, Circl-11(3),Bangalore Appellant Respondent C.O. No.49/Bang/2013 (Arising Out Of Ita No.1374/Bang/2012) Assessment Year: 2006-07 Shri Sumir J. Hinduja Vs. Dcit, Circl-11(3),Bangalore Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Susan Dolores George, D.R. Respondent By : Shri Ashok A Kulkarni, A.R.

For Appellant: Shri Susan Dolores George, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Ashok A Kulkarni, A.R
Section 147Section 148Section 2(22)(e)

…acceptable in this regard. In this context, the appellant relied on the following decisions in his submissions: 1) CIT Vs. Rajkumar 318 ITR 462 (Delhi HC) 2) CIT Vs. Creative Dying and Printing (P) Ltd. 318 ITR 476 (Delhi HC) 3) Pradip Kumar Malhotra Vs. CIT 338 ITR 538 (Calcutta HC) 4) CIT Vs. Gurbachanlal 339 ITR 157 (Delhi HC) 12.3 The Hon'ble HC of Delhi in the case of CIT Vs. Rajkumar 318 ITR 462 mentioned above explained the meaning of (loan/advance' provided in section 2(22)(e) of the Act. It has been ITA Nos.1373 & 1374/Bang/2012 & CO. Nos.48 & 49/Bang/2013 Shri Jagadish N. Hinduja, Bangalore Page 40 o…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. Shri. Jagadish N Hinduja, Bangalore

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue and COs filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1373/BANG/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Jul 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2006-07 Shri Jagadish N. Hinduja Deputy Commissioner Of Income- No.7 & 12, Industrial Suburb Tax Tumkur Road Vs. Circle 11(3) Yeshwanthpur Bangalore Bangalore 560 022 Pan No.Aacph7291Q Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2006-07 Shri Sumir J. Hinduja Deputy Commissioner Of Income- No.7 & 12, Industrial Suburb Tax Tumkur Road Vs. Circle 11(3) Yeshwanthpur Bangalore Bangalore 560 022 Pan No.Aaeph5197H Appellant Respondent C.O. No.48/Bang/2013 (Arising Out Of Ita No.1373/Bang/2012) Assessment Year: 2006-07 Shri Jagadish N. Hinduja Vs. Dcit, Circl-11(3),Bangalore Appellant Respondent C.O. No.49/Bang/2013 (Arising Out Of Ita No.1374/Bang/2012) Assessment Year: 2006-07 Shri Sumir J. Hinduja Vs. Dcit, Circl-11(3),Bangalore Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Susan Dolores George, D.R. Respondent By : Shri Ashok A Kulkarni, A.R.

For Appellant: Shri Susan Dolores George, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Ashok A Kulkarni, A.R
Section 147Section 148Section 2(22)(e)

…acceptable in this regard. In this context, the appellant relied on the following decisions in his submissions: 1) CIT Vs. Rajkumar 318 ITR 462 (Delhi HC) 2) CIT Vs. Creative Dying and Printing (P) Ltd. 318 ITR 476 (Delhi HC) 3) Pradip Kumar Malhotra Vs. CIT 338 ITR 538 (Calcutta HC) 4) CIT Vs. Gurbachanlal 339 ITR 157 (Delhi HC) 12.3 The Hon'ble HC of Delhi in the case of CIT Vs. Rajkumar 318 ITR 462 mentioned above explained the meaning of (loan/advance' provided in section 2(22)(e) of the Act. It has been ITA Nos.1373 & 1374/Bang/2012 & CO. Nos.48 & 49/Bang/2013 Shri Jagadish N. Hinduja, Bangalore Page 40 o…

Wep Peripherals Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1905/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2012 – 13

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Pradeep, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Srinivas Rao Bandaru, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)

…Peripherals Ltd., Bangalore Page 15 of 18 “The Hon’ble High Court further relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court “CIT v. Raj Kumar” (2009) 318 ITR 462 (Delhi) and Hon’ble Kolkata High Court in the case of "Pradip Kumar Malhotra Vs. ITO" (2011) 338 ITR 538 (Cal), and has observed that the combined meaning of the various clause of prow of section 2(22)(e) of the Act is to mean that the payments included as deemed dividend would mean the gratuitous payments to a shareholder meant to avoid the taxation of Income u/s.1150 of the Act. Further in Para 24 of the order in the said case of "Bagmane Constru…

Iss Facility Services India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 10(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the assessee is partly allowed in the terms of aforesaid

ITA 411/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri M. Balaganeshआअसं.411/मुं/2018 ("न. व. 2013-14) Iss Facility Services India Private Limited The Qube, B 401/404 & A 402 Behind Taj Stats, Village Marol Sahar Road, Andheri (East) Mumbai – 400 059 ..... अपीलाथ" /Appellant Pan: Aabc13815M बनाम/Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax- 10(1)(2) Room No. 14, 20Th Floor, Air India Building, ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 021

For Appellant: Shri. M.P. Lohia with Shri. Nikhil TiwariFor Respondent: Shri Yogesh Kamat, CIT- DR
Section 143(3)Section 92C

…use referred to as the said concern), or any payment by any such company on behalf, or for the individual benefit, of any such shareholder, to the extent to which the company in either case possesses accumulated profits;....” In Pradip Kumar Malhotra v. CIT: 338 ITR 538 Hon’ble Calcutta High Court observed as under: “10. ......we are of the opinion that the phrase "by way of advance or loan" appearing in sub-clause (e) must be construed to mean those advances or loans which a share holder enjoys for simply on account of being a person who is the beneficial owner of shares (not being shares entitled to a fixed ra…

Sumit Mohansingh Gandhi, Mumbai vs. Asstt. CIT -25(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 115/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Rahul Chaudharysumit Mohansingh Vs. Assistant Commissioner Gandhi, 44/43, Movie Of Income Tax-25(1) Tower, Oshiwara Near Room No. 202, 2Nd Floor, Yamuna Nagar, Andheri Kautilya Bhavan, C-41 To (W) Mumbai – 400053 C-43, G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai – 400051 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Atzps3217K Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Paresh DodhiyaFor Respondent: Shri B.K. Bagchi
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)

…med dividend u/s 2(22)(e) of the Act. The ld. Counsel also referred the judicial pronouncement in the case of Bagmane Construction Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT (2014) (Karnataka) ITA No. 473/2013; CIT Vs. Rajkumar (2009) 318 ITR 462 (Delhi); Pradeep Kumar Vs. ITO (2011) 338 ITR 538 (Kolkata. On the other hand the ld. D.R has relied on the order of the lower authorities. 4 ITA No.115/Mum/2021 A.Y.2013-14 Sumit Mohansingh Gandhi Vs. ACIT-25(1) 6. Heard both the side and perused the material on record. During the year the assessee has received advance rent amounting to Rs.6,90,000/- on let-out of his office premises to Asian…

DCIT, Circle-1*1(, New Delhi vs. Aalap Digital Music P.Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 5733/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aakash Deep Jainshri N.K. Billaiya.

For Appellant: Shri Nirbhay Mehta, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Alka Gautam, Sr. DR
Section 2(22)(e)

…ed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) of the Act. Similar view was taken by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT Vs Creative Dyeing & Printing Pvt. Ltd. 318 ITR 476 and also by the Hon'ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of Pradip kumar Malhotra Vs CIT 338 ITR 538. 16. Considering the factual matrix of the transactions, we do not find any error or infirmity in the findings of the ld. CIT(A). 17. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No. 5733/DEL/2017 is dismissed. The order is pronounced in the open court on 21.03.2022. [AAKASH DEEP JAIN] [N.K. BILLAIYA] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 6, Pune vs. M Subu Chem Pvt.Ltd, Pune

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA No

ITA 152/PUN/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jan 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri Hari KrishanFor Respondent: Shri S.P. Walimbe
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 2(22)(e)

…uitous loan or advance given by the company to the assessee. It is a pure business transaction carried out by the company i.e. M/s. Subu Chem Pvt. Ltd. and ratio laid down by the Hon‟ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of Pradeep Kumar Malhotra reported in 338 ITR 538 is squrely applicable to the present case which is reads as under : “After hearing the learned Counsel for the parties and after going through the aforesaid provisions of the Act, we are of the opinion that the phrase "by way of advance or loan" appearing in sub-clause (e) must be construed to mean those advances or loans which a shareholder enj…

M/S. Subu Chem Pvt.Ltd, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle - 6, Pune

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA No

ITA 2526/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jan 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri Hari KrishanFor Respondent: Shri S.P. Walimbe
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 2(22)(e)

…uitous loan or advance given by the company to the assessee. It is a pure business transaction carried out by the company i.e. M/s. Subu Chem Pvt. Ltd. and ratio laid down by the Hon‟ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of Pradeep Kumar Malhotra reported in 338 ITR 538 is squrely applicable to the present case which is reads as under : “After hearing the learned Counsel for the parties and after going through the aforesaid provisions of the Act, we are of the opinion that the phrase "by way of advance or loan" appearing in sub-clause (e) must be construed to mean those advances or loans which a shareholder enj…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 6, Pune vs. Jitendra K. Gupta, Pune

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA No

ITA 135/PUN/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jan 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri Hari KrishanFor Respondent: Shri S.P. Walimbe
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 2(22)(e)

…uitous loan or advance given by the company to the assessee. It is a pure business transaction carried out by the company i.e. M/s. Subu Chem Pvt. Ltd. and ratio laid down by the Hon‟ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of Pradeep Kumar Malhotra reported in 338 ITR 538 is squrely applicable to the present case which is reads as under : “After hearing the learned Counsel for the parties and after going through the aforesaid provisions of the Act, we are of the opinion that the phrase "by way of advance or loan" appearing in sub-clause (e) must be construed to mean those advances or loans which a shareholder enj…

Jitendra Kapildeo Gupta, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle -6, Pune

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA No

ITA 2522/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jan 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri Hari KrishanFor Respondent: Shri S.P. Walimbe
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 2(22)(e)

…uitous loan or advance given by the company to the assessee. It is a pure business transaction carried out by the company i.e. M/s. Subu Chem Pvt. Ltd. and ratio laid down by the Hon‟ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of Pradeep Kumar Malhotra reported in 338 ITR 538 is squrely applicable to the present case which is reads as under : “After hearing the learned Counsel for the parties and after going through the aforesaid provisions of the Act, we are of the opinion that the phrase "by way of advance or loan" appearing in sub-clause (e) must be construed to mean those advances or loans which a shareholder enj…

Geeta Bhasin, Noida vs. JCIT, Range- 32, New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4600/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Nov 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Geeta Bhasin, Vs. Jcit, C/O. Sandeep Sapra, Adv, C-763, Range-32, New Friends Colony, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Acdpb6005D (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Sapra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 2Section 68Section 69A

…nd in the hands of the assessee. He relied upon the following judicial precedents:- CIT v. NS Narendra IT Appeal No. 557/Bang/2013 (para 10) affirmed  by honourable Karnataka High Court. Pradip Kumar Malhotra v. CIT [2011] 15 taxmann.com 66/203  Taxman 110/338 ITR 538 (Cal.) (para 5) Jamuna Vernekar v. Dy. CIT [IT Appeal No. 43 of 2013, dated 10-2-  2021] (para 5) Bagmane Constructions (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [2015] 57 taxmann.com  120/231 Taxman 260 (Kar.) (para 5)  CIT v. Creative Dyeing & Printing (P.) Ltd. [2009] 184 Taxman 483/318 ITR 476 (Delhi) (para 5) CIT v. Ambassador Travels (P.) Ltd. [2008] 173 Taxman…

ACIT Corporate Circle 2, Coimbatore vs. Late Shri Naren Rajan, Rep.by L/H Smt. Padmini V.R, Coimbatore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 is partly allowed and appeal filed by the Revenue for assessment year 2012-13 is dismissed

ITA 1161/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Aug 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Vasudevan, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri G. Srinivasa Rao, CIT
Section 2(22)(e)

…ween the parties and the amount given was not to be treated as 'loan' or 'advance' for the purpose of invoking the provisions of section 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act. iv) The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Pradip Kumar Malhotra vs. CIT in [2011] 338 ITR 538 (Cal) held as under: “the phrase “by way of advance or loan” appearing in sub-clause (e) must be construed to mean those advances or loans which a shareholder enjoys for simply on account of being a person who is the beneficial owner of shares (not being shares entitled to a fixed rate of dividend whether with or without a right to participate in…

Padmini Rajan, L/R of Late (Shri) Naren Rajan, Coimbatore vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 2, Coimbatore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 is partly allowed and appeal filed by the Revenue for assessment year 2012-13 is dismissed

ITA 1002/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Aug 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Vasudevan, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri G. Srinivasa Rao, CIT
Section 2(22)(e)

…ween the parties and the amount given was not to be treated as 'loan' or 'advance' for the purpose of invoking the provisions of section 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act. iv) The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Pradip Kumar Malhotra vs. CIT in [2011] 338 ITR 538 (Cal) held as under: “the phrase “by way of advance or loan” appearing in sub-clause (e) must be construed to mean those advances or loans which a shareholder enjoys for simply on account of being a person who is the beneficial owner of shares (not being shares entitled to a fixed rate of dividend whether with or without a right to participate in…

Naren Rajan, Coimbatore vs. ACIT, Coimbatore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 is partly allowed and appeal filed by the Revenue for assessment year 2012-13 is dismissed

ITA 743/CHNY/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Aug 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Vasudevan, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri G. Srinivasa Rao, CIT
Section 2(22)(e)

…ween the parties and the amount given was not to be treated as 'loan' or 'advance' for the purpose of invoking the provisions of section 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act. iv) The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Pradip Kumar Malhotra vs. CIT in [2011] 338 ITR 538 (Cal) held as under: “the phrase “by way of advance or loan” appearing in sub-clause (e) must be construed to mean those advances or loans which a shareholder enjoys for simply on account of being a person who is the beneficial owner of shares (not being shares entitled to a fixed rate of dividend whether with or without a right to participate in…

Kiran Dwarakanath Sekhar, Hyderabd, Hyderabad vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 365/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Jun 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Duvvuru R.L. Reddyassessment Year: 2010-11 Naresh Kumar Sekhar, Vs. Income-Tax Officer, Hyderabad. Ward – 2(1), Hyderabad. Pan – Abapt 0359G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Kiran Dwarakanath Vs. Income-Tax Officer, Sekhar, Hyderabad. Ward – 2(1), Hyderabad. Pan – Afvps 5346D (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Shri PRohit Mujumdar
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 2(22)(e)Section 251

…t be considered from the benefit angle as envisaged under section 2(22)(e), it is observed that the judicial pronouncements cited by the ld. counsel for the assessee clearly support the case of the assessee. 6. In the case of Pradip Kumar Malhotra reported in 338 ITR 538 cited by the ld. counsel for the assesese, it :- 9 -: ITA Nos. 364 & 365/Hyd/2017 Naresh Kumar Sekhar and another, Hyd. was held by the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court that the phrase “by way of advance or loan” appearing in section 2(22)(e) must be construed to mean those advances or loans, which a shareholder enjoys for simply on account of being…

Naresh Kumar Sekher, Hyderabd, Hyderabad vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 364/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Jun 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Duvvuru R.L. Reddyassessment Year: 2010-11 Naresh Kumar Sekhar, Vs. Income-Tax Officer, Hyderabad. Ward – 2(1), Hyderabad. Pan – Abapt 0359G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Kiran Dwarakanath Vs. Income-Tax Officer, Sekhar, Hyderabad. Ward – 2(1), Hyderabad. Pan – Afvps 5346D (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Shri PRohit Mujumdar
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 2(22)(e)Section 251

…t be considered from the benefit angle as envisaged under section 2(22)(e), it is observed that the judicial pronouncements cited by the ld. counsel for the assessee clearly support the case of the assessee. 6. In the case of Pradip Kumar Malhotra reported in 338 ITR 538 cited by the ld. counsel for the assesese, it :- 9 -: ITA Nos. 364 & 365/Hyd/2017 Naresh Kumar Sekhar and another, Hyd. was held by the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court that the phrase “by way of advance or loan” appearing in section 2(22)(e) must be construed to mean those advances or loans, which a shareholder enjoys for simply on account of being…

ACIT, Cir.43, Kolkata vs. M/.S Dulichand Champalal Textile, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 27/KOL/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 May 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey)

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)Section 250Section 68

…ng at length, from page 23 to 49 of his order, deleted the additions made u/s 68 of the Act. He also deleted the additions made u/s 2(22)(e) of the Act by applying the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Pradip Kr. Malhotra vs. CIT (2011) 338 ITR 538 (Cal), as the loan in question carried interest @12% per annum. 4. Aggrieved, the Revenue is in appeal before us. 5. The ld. D/R relied on the order of the AO and argued that the ld. CIT(A) has not taken a holistic view of the matter and has wrongly deleted the additions made by the AO u/s 68 of the Act. He wanted the Bench to reconsider the evid…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Bellary vs. Sri Sirwar Basavaraj, Bellary

In the result appeal filed by revenue stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1902/BANG/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Mar 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri. B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Siva Prasad Reddy, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kannan Narayanan, JCIT
Section 14Section 142Section 143Section 2Section 2(22)(e)

…ned in the course of business applying the ratio of the Hon'ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of Daga and Company P Ltd, 227 ITR 480. (iii) Applying the ratio of another decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of Pradeep Kumar Malhotra 338 ITR 538, the payments are not gratuitous loan or advance given by the company to its shareholder and therefore, the same cannot be termed as deemed dividend. (iv). Applying the ratio of the Hon'ble Tribunal, Kolkatta in the case of ITO vs. Gayatri Chakraborthy in ITA No.151/Kol/2013, the transactions Page 4 of 8 cannot be termed as deemed dividend u/s 2…

DCIT, Circle- 62(1), New Delhi vs. Ramesh Kumar Pabbi, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6168/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Mar 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Ms. Suchitra Kamble(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year : 2013-14 Dcit Vs. Ramesh Kumar Pabbi Circle – 62(1), A-41, Phase-Ii, New Delhi Mayapuri Industrial Area, New Delhi-110017 Pan – Aanpp 5995 Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Sohail Malik, Sr.D.R. Revenue By Shri Lalit Mohan, Adv. Date Of Hearing: 16/03/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 16/03/2021 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am:

Section 143(3)Section 194JSection 2(22)(e)Section 40

…s also stated that the transaction was expansion of company’s business, as the business of appellant was subsequently to be taken over by the company providing the loan, the transaction was a commercial transaction. In the case of Pradip Kumar Malhotra v. CIT 338 ITR 538 it was held that the phrase “by way of advance or loan” appearing in section 2(22)(e) must be construed to mean those advances or loans, which a shareholder enjoys for simply on account of being a partner, who is the beneficial owner of shares, but if such loan or advance is given to such shareholder as a consequence of any further consideration,…

M.Kiran Kumar, Chennai vs. ACIT Central Circle-1(4), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3374/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Mar 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri G.Baskar, Advocate
Section 10(38)Section 133ASection 2(22)(e)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘सी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी वी दुगा" राव,"या"यक सद"य एवं "ी जी. मंजुनाथ, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA N.: 3374/CHNY/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16 Shri M. Kiran Kumar, The ACIT, 123, Usman Road, T. Nagar, v. Corporate Circle 1(4), Chennai – 600 017. Chennai. PAN: ACHPM2247E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant by : Shri G.Baskar, Advocate : Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar, ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent by Sr Standing Cou…