R Talwar 305 ITR 286 4. CIT vs. G. Narasimhan 236 ITR 329(1999) 5. CIT v. P.K. Badiani 6. Tarulata Shyam vs. CIT

105 ITR 62High Court1976#21884 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2020.

Judgments citing R Talwar 305 ITR 286 4. CIT vs. G. Narasimhan 236 ITR 329(1999) 5. CIT v. P.K. Badiani 6. Tarulata Shyam vs. CIT

ACIT 1(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Jasubhai Engineering P.Ltd, Mumbai

Accordingly, grounds raised by revenue are dismissed

ITA 7519/MUM/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Mar 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 7519/Mum/2016 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14)

For Appellant: Shri Mohd. Rizwan, DRFor Respondent: Shri K. Shivaram /Rahul

Section 2(22)(e)

…e is already holding substantial interest and in this regard, he relied on the following case law:- i) Bajaj Auto Holding Ltd vrs. DCIT (2005) 95 ITD 356. ii) Smt. Tarulata Shyam & Others vrs. CIT (1977) 108 ITR 345 (SC). iii) CIT vrs. Bhagwat Tewari (1979) 105 ITR 62 (Kol) 9. Accordingly, Ld. DR submitted that it is clear case of application of provisions of deemed dividend and relied on the findings of AO. 10. On the other hand, Ld. AR submitted that Ld. DR is referring to the case of Bajaj Auto Holding Ltd vrs. DCIT, which is relating to international taxation, whereas we are dealing with section 2(22)(e),…

DCIT, Circle - 10(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Dream Bake Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 242/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jan 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)Section 40S(2)(b)

…J 10S ITR 345 (SC) [it was held that section 2(22)(e) of the IT Act 1961 is applicable even if loan is repaid before the end of the previous year. In other words, the liability is attracted at the moment the loan is given] and in CIT vs. Bhagwat Tewari [1976J 105 ITR 62 (Cal) [It was held that even bona fide loan for short duration is treated as dividend if all the conditions of section 2(22)(e ) are satisfied.] 1.3 The assessee in writing, during the course of hearing explained that Switz foods Pvt Ltd having IT PAN: AAECS1805N is one of the associate/sister concern and filed the detail of transactions. Further,…

Bharat Bir Mohindra, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

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

ITA 462/CHNY/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Sept 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Chandra Poojari] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 462/Mds/2013 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2007-2008

For Appellant: Shri. K. Gangadhara Sastry, ITPFor Respondent: Shri. P. Suresh Rao, JCIT

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(22)Section 2(22)(e)

…495 dated 22.9.1987 issued by CBDT. 2. Miss. P.Sarada Vs. CIT (1998) 229 ITR 444 3. CIT Vs. S R Talwar 305 ITR 286 4. CIT vs. G. Narasimhan 236 ITR 329(1999) 5. CIT Vs. P.K. Badiani 6. Tarulata Shyam vs. CIT (1977) 108 ITR (SC) 7.CIT vs. Bhagwat Tewari (1976) 105 ITR 62 (Ca/). ITA No.462/Mds/2013. :- 4 -: Thus, the AO concluded that the amount of loan received by the assessee company from M/s. Classic Linens International Ltd., to the extent of accumulated profit of `1,59,04,178/- as on 31.3.07 is treated as deemed dividend in the hands of the assessee and is chargeable to tax under the head "income from Other…