Satya Prasad v. Income Tax Officer

141 ITD 403Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2013#8248 most cited
14

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2024.

Also reported as

31 Taxmann.com 267

Issues it is cited on

accumulated profitscompulsory acquisitionsection 2(22)deemed dividendsection 2(22)(e)beneficial ownerincome from other sourcesprevious yeartransferpersoncompanyindia

Judgments citing Satya Prasad v. Income Tax Officer

SMS TOLLS AND DEVELOPERS,NAGPUR vs. ITO, WARD 1(5), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed in terms indicated above

ITA 348/NAG/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur18 Nov 2024AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri Kapil HiraniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 2(22)(e)

…ort of the argument, the learned Counsel relied on the proposition laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in CIT v/s Damodharan, [1980] 121 ITR 572 (SC) and in the Co–ordinate Bench decision of the Tribunal, Vishakapatnam Bench, in P. Satya Prasad v/s ITO [2013] 141 ITD 403]. 5. However, the submissions of the assessee were not considered properly, and the Assessing Officer calculated proportionate profit upto the date of 4 SMS Tolls and Developers Ltd. advances of ` 2,64,51,100, and added the same to the total income of the assessee under section 2(22)(e) of the Act. It is not clear from the assessment order that…

DR. L.S. RAVI PRAKASH,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5(1), BANGALORE

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

ITA 30/BANG/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Oct 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri G. Sathyanarayana, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Praveen Karanth, D.R
Section 78

…ITA No.30 /Bang/2021 Dr. L.S. Ravi Prakash, Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2011-12 Dr. L.S. Ravi Prakash C/o Kala Farm Deputy Commissioner of Rajarajeshwari Nagar P.O. Income-tax Vs. Bangalore 560 098 Circle-5(1) Bangalore PAN NO : AFSPP0916P APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri G. Sathyanarayana, A.R. Respondent by : Shri Praveen Karanth, D.R. Date of Hearing : 14.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 28.10.2022 O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: Thi…

M/S. DEVANAM CONSTRUCTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 2(1)(2), BANGALORE

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

ITA 2644/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 May 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Nitish Ranjan, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Sankar Ganesh K, JCIT-DR
Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)

…is contention, the Ld. A.R. placed his reliance on the decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. G Narasimhan (1999)236 ITR 327 and also the decision rendered by Visakhapatnam Bench of ITAT in the case of P. Satya Prasad Vs. ITO (2013) 31 Taxmann.com 267. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the above said case has held that when a loan given by a company to a shareholder is treated as deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) of the Act, it has to be treated as payment made from out of the accumulated profits of the company and hence the same should be adjusted against accumulated profits. It was further held…

M/S ASSETZ INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the grounds 3

ITA 563/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri B.R. Baskaranassessment Year:2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Padam Chand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Besaganni, D.R
Section 2(22)(e)

…is contention, the Ld. A.R. placed his reliance on the decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. G Narasimhan (1999)236 ITR 327 and also the decision rendered by Visakhapatnam Bench of ITAT in the case of P. Satya Prasad Vs. ITO (2013) 31 Taxmann.com 267. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the above said case has held that when a loan given by a company to a shareholder is treated as deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) of the Act, it has to be treated as payment made from out of the accumulated profits of the company and hence the same should be adjusted against accumulated profits. It was further held…

ACIT, TRIVANDRUM vs. SRI.BABY MATHEW, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed,

ITA 269/COCH/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin08 Feb 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 2(22)(e)

…as accumulated profits were there in earlier years. 4. On appeal, the CIT(A) observed that in view of the working of the accumulated profit and deemed dividend, based on the decision of the ITAT, Visakhapatnam Bench in the case of P. Satya Prasad vs. ITO (141 ITD 403) which followed the decision of the ITAT, Cochin Bench in the case of ITO vs. Gordhandas Khimji (11 ITD 158) which in turn again considered the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Smt. Tarulata Shyam vs. CIT (108 ITR 345), the deemed dividend which can be considered for taxation u/s. 2(22)(e) as ordered by the Tribunal can be worked o…

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

…tain terms it would emerge as an account which is nothing but current account in the character. Therefore, deemed dividend cannot be brought into play in case of current account. The ld.AR further placing reliance on the decision in the case of P.Satya Prasad 141 ITD 403 (Visakhapatnam) submitted that current years profit accrues only at the end of the year, therefore, for working out deemed dividend u/s.2(22)(e) only accumulated profits at the beginning of the year needs to be considered. Further placing reliance in the case of Kewal Kumar Jain (supra) it was contended that such addition needs to be restricted t…

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

…tain terms it would emerge as an account which is nothing but current account in the character. Therefore, deemed dividend cannot be brought into play in case of current account. The ld.AR further placing reliance on the decision in the case of P.Satya Prasad 141 ITD 403 (Visakhapatnam) submitted that current years profit accrues only at the end of the year, therefore, for working out deemed dividend u/s.2(22)(e) only accumulated profits at the beginning of the year needs to be considered. Further placing reliance in the case of Kewal Kumar Jain (supra) it was contended that such addition needs to be restricted t…

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

…tain terms it would emerge as an account which is nothing but current account in the character. Therefore, deemed dividend cannot be brought into play in case of current account. The ld.AR further placing reliance on the decision in the case of P.Satya Prasad 141 ITD 403 (Visakhapatnam) submitted that current years profit accrues only at the end of the year, therefore, for working out deemed dividend u/s.2(22)(e) only accumulated profits at the beginning of the year needs to be considered. Further placing reliance in the case of Kewal Kumar Jain (supra) it was contended that such addition needs to be restricted t…

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

…tain terms it would emerge as an account which is nothing but current account in the character. Therefore, deemed dividend cannot be brought into play in case of current account. The ld.AR further placing reliance on the decision in the case of P.Satya Prasad 141 ITD 403 (Visakhapatnam) submitted that current years profit accrues only at the end of the year, therefore, for working out deemed dividend u/s.2(22)(e) only accumulated profits at the beginning of the year needs to be considered. Further placing reliance in the case of Kewal Kumar Jain (supra) it was contended that such addition needs to be restricted t…

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

…tain terms it would emerge as an account which is nothing but current account in the character. Therefore, deemed dividend cannot be brought into play in case of current account. The ld.AR further placing reliance on the decision in the case of P.Satya Prasad 141 ITD 403 (Visakhapatnam) submitted that current years profit accrues only at the end of the year, therefore, for working out deemed dividend u/s.2(22)(e) only accumulated profits at the beginning of the year needs to be considered. Further placing reliance in the case of Kewal Kumar Jain (supra) it was contended that such addition needs to be restricted t…

ITO 9 (1) (1), MUMBAI vs. MANOJ UPADHYAY, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed wherein

ITA 5172/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm Income Tax Officer - 9(1)(1) Vs. Mr. Manoj Upadhyay Mumbai C/O. Accu Dat Transcription Services Pvt. Ltd., 2Nd Floor, Linkage House, 6 Marol Co-Op Industrial Estate, Marol, Andheri (E) Mumbai – 400 059

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(22)(e)

…s shall exclude the current year's . In this context Ld. AR relied on Judicial decisions as under :- i) ITL Fabrics Pvt Ltd vs. A CIT (2012) 19 ITR (Trib) 499 (Mumbai) ii) Sunil P. Mantri vs. ACIT ITA No. 5402/M/2011 &5407/M/2011 P. Satya Prasad vs. ITO iii) 31 Taxmann.com 267 (ITAT-Visakhapatnam) iv) M.B. Stock Holding Pvt Ltd vs. ACIT 84ITD-342 (ITAT-Ahd) v) ClT vs. P.K. Badiani 76ITR 369 (HC-Bom) vi) CIT vs. V. Damodaran 121 ITRR 522 (SC) 3,2 On perusal of the above stated judicial pronouncements, it is observed that it is a settled law that the accumulated profits of the company shall not include the current…

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)

…s against the accumulated profits of the last year of Rs.5,01,44,572/- (at page 300 of the paper book). The ld. AR to support this alternate argument placed reliance on the decision of Tribunal in the case of P. Satya Prasad Vs. Income Tax Officer reported as 141 ITD 403 (Visakhapatnam). 3.7 The ld. AR finally submitted that the assessee is a partnership firm and thus, is not a separate legal entity. The assessee cannot be a shareholder in any of the companies. For attracting the provisions of section 2(22)(e) it is necessary to be a registered shareholder holding 10% or more shares in any of the group companies…

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)

…s against the accumulated profits of the last year of Rs.5,01,44,572/- (at page 300 of the paper book). The ld. AR to support this alternate argument placed reliance on the decision of Tribunal in the case of P. Satya Prasad Vs. Income Tax Officer reported as 141 ITD 403 (Visakhapatnam). 3.7 The ld. AR finally submitted that the assessee is a partnership firm and thus, is not a separate legal entity. The assessee cannot be a shareholder in any of the companies. For attracting the provisions of section 2(22)(e) it is necessary to be a registered shareholder holding 10% or more shares in any of the group companies…

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)

…t year. More so, amount of accumulated profits has to be determined on date on which loans were given by company and not at the end of year. The ld. AR also placed reliance on the decision of Vishaka Bench of the Tribunal in the case of P.Satya Prasad Vs ITO 141 ITD 403 (Vishaka Trib). Ld. AR further submitted that M/s Classic Linens International Pvt Ltd is a company in which the public are not substantially interested and possess accumulated profit of `1,27,08,173/- as on 01/04/2006 and `1,59,04,178/- as on 31/03/2007. The Assessee holds 83.71% shares of M/s Classic Linens International Pvt Ltd during the fi…