“deemed dividend”

DCIT, CC - 2(4), Mumbai vs. Mishal Nickunj Shah Shri. L/H. of Late Nickunj Gunvantrai Shah, Mumbai

Accordingly, grounds raised by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

course of proceedings u/s [2018] 99 taxmann.com 111 (Bombay High 153A, AO made certain additions to Court) assessee's income, in respect of deemed dividend, in view of the fact that 111 assessment for relevant years had attained finality and no incriminating material High was found in course of search

DCIT, CC - 2(4), Mumbai vs. Mishal Nickunj Shah Shri. L/H. of Late Nickunj Gunvantrai Shah, Mumbai

Accordingly, grounds raised by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

course of proceedings u/s [2018] 99 taxmann.com 111 (Bombay High 153A, AO made certain additions to Court) assessee's income, in respect of deemed dividend, in view of the fact that 111 assessment for relevant years had attained finality and no incriminating material High was found in course of search

Yogesh Mehra, Mumbai vs. Principle CIT-2, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Amarjit Singhyogesh Mehra Vs. Pcit-2 201, Hare Krishna Room No. 1920, Building, Presidency Air India Building, Society, North South Mumbai - 400021 Road No. 8, Jvpd, Vile Parle, (West), Mumbai – 400049 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaapm6139N Appellant .. Respondent

opening credit balances appearing in the name of WWIL in the books of sister concerns has to be considered for the purpose of computing deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(c) of the Act disregarding the various decisions. 5. On the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case ... company. Therefore vide order u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act dated 28.12.2019, considered the aggregate amount of Rs.46,65,820/- as deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) of the Act in the case of the assessee and added to the total income. 3. Subsequently, the ld. Pr.CIT

Sheetal Clothing Co Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-5(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

grievance of the revenue is only with regard to finding in the impugned order on the merits of the individual claim regarding gifts and deemed dividend. However once it is not disputed by the revenue that the decision of this Court in Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. (supra) would

Sheetal Clothing Co Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-5(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

grievance of the revenue is only with regard to finding in the impugned order on the merits of the individual claim regarding gifts and deemed dividend. However once it is not disputed by the revenue that the decision of this Court in Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. (supra) would

Dy CIT CC-1(4), Mumbai vs. M/S Grasim Industries Ltd., Mumbai

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

erred in directing the Id. AO to adopt value of the shares of the resulting company at Rs.145.40 per share for the purpose computing deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(a) of the Act. 5.2 Without prejudice to the above, the Id CIT(A) failed to appreciate that ... deemed dividend is to be computed u/s 2(22)(a) of the Act, then the liability of DDT payable in respect of Appellant's non-resident shareholders is to be computed having regard to provisions of the respective Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement. 5.3 The Appellant submits that the valuation adopted

Grasim Industries Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT, Central Circle-1(4), Mumbai

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

erred in directing the Id. AO to adopt value of the shares of the resulting company at Rs.145.40 per share for the purpose computing deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(a) of the Act. 5.2 Without prejudice to the above, the Id CIT(A) failed to appreciate that ... deemed dividend is to be computed u/s 2(22)(a) of the Act, then the liability of DDT payable in respect of Appellant's non-resident shareholders is to be computed having regard to provisions of the respective Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement. 5.3 The Appellant submits that the valuation adopted

Shri Sanjay Shantilal Jain, Mumbai vs. JCIT, Central Range-8, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for assessment year

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2014-15

upholding the addition of Rs. 4. (a) The Ld. CIT(A) erred in facts and law in upholding the addition of Rs. 48.03.763/ as deemed dividend u/s. 2(22)(e) of the Act (b) The Ld. CIT(A) 48.03.763/ as deemed dividend ... deemed The ground No. four of the appeal relates to addition of deemed The ground No. four of the appeal relates to addition of deemed dividend of ₹ 40, 03, 763/ 40, 03, 763/-. SHRI SANJAY SHANTILAL JAIN ITA No.6140,6125,6126,6127,6127,6128/MUM/2018 ITA No.6140

Dy.C.I.T. Cent. Cir-6(2), Mumbai vs. Shri Dilip B.Jiwrajka, Mumbai

In the result, the Cross Objections for AYs 2012-13 & 2013-14

amount of Rs.43.67 lakhs (accumulated profits of the lendor) out of Rs.1.5 crores received as loan from one K.P. Developers Pvt. Ltd. as deemed dividend under Section 2(22)(e) of the Act. Undisputedly, respondent- assessee was a shareholder in M/s K.P. Developers (P) Ltd. The aforesaid additions are reflected ... assessee's total income at Rs.1.47 crores. 4. In appeal, the CIT(A) held that the addition of an amount of Rs.43.67 lakhs as deemed dividend has to be deleted. This on the ground that there were no accumulated profits available with M/s K.P. Developers (P) Ltd. to distribute amongst

Hari Kumar Ruliram Sharma, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-17(1) (5), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2014-15 Hari Kumar Ruliram Sharma, Income Tax Officer, Ward-17(1)(5), 110 Sterling Chambers, Poona Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Street, Masjit Bunder (East), Vs. Churchgate, Mumbai-400-009. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaups 1542 F Appellant Respondent : Assessee By Mr. M. Subramanian, Ar : Revenue By Mr. Tejinder Pal Singh Anand, Dr Date Of Hearing : 21/11/2022 : Date Of Pronouncement 25/11/2022

addition addition addition of of of an an an amount amount amount of of of Rs.4,21,66,567/ Rs.4,21,66,567/- as deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) of the act. as deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) of the act. 4. On the facts ... completed on 29.12.2016 after making addition of completed on 29.12.2016 after making addition of tax Act, 1961 (in for deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) of the Income for deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) and disallowance

ITO 30 (1) (1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Blossom Developers, Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleito 30(1)(1) Vs. M/S Blossom Room No. 436, 4Th Floor Developers Kautilya Bhavan, Bkc Survey No. 273, Village G Block, Bandra(East) Dindoshi, Pathanwadi Mumbai – 400051. Malad (E), Mumbai – 400097. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aahfb6147Q Appellant .. Respondent M/S Blossom Vs. Ito 30(1)(1) Developers Room No. 436, 4Th Survey No. 273, Village Floor Dindoshi, Pathanwadi Kautilya Bhavan, Bkc Malad (E), G Block, Bandra Mumbai – 400097. Mumbai – 400 051. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aahfb6147Q Appellant .. Respondent

therefore the AO applied the provisions of Sec. 2(22)(e) of the Act and made addition of Rs.2,80,000/- as deemed dividend. Finally the AO has assessed the total income of Rs. 3,10,32,770/- and passed the order u/s 143(3) of the Act dated ... granted partial relief and in respect of brokerage and commission the CIT(A) has granted marginal relief and on the disputed issue of deemed dividend the CIT(A) has deleted the addition relying on the judicial decisions and partly allowed the ITA No. 62 & 1152/Mum/2022 M/s Blossom Developers, Mumbai. assessee

ACIT Central Cir. 6(4), Mumbai vs. Shri Ajay Virendra Arora, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 2149/Mum/2021 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Ajay Virendra Acit-Cen.Circle – 6(4), Arora, R. No. 1925, 19Th Floor, Air 6Th Floor, S14, Solitaire India Building, Nariman बिधम/ Corporate Park, Guru Point, Mumbai-400 021 Vs. Hargovindji Marg, Chakala, Andheri(East), Mumbai-400 093 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. Addpa6742R (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Salil Mishra, Ld. Dr प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Jitendra Jain/ Shri Ravikant Pathak, Ld. Ars सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 03.10.2022 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 22.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Amit Shukla: The Aforesaid Appeal Has Been Filed By The Revenue Against The Impugned Order Dated 25.08.2021, Passed By Ld. Cit(A)-54, Mumbai For The Quantum Of Assessment Passed U/S 153A R.W.S.

Decor Exports Private Limited) of Rs.23,97,43,607/-, which is nothing but 'loans and advances', hence the same ought to be treated as 'deemed dividend' as per the provisions of Section 2(22)(e) of the Income tax Act, 1963." 2. "On the facts and in the circumstances ... carried out in the case of D‟ Décor Group on 06.03.2018 in which assessee was also covered. 3. In so far as issue on deemed dividend is concerned, Ld. AO has noted that from the perusal of the ledger account of the assessee in the books of D‟ Decor Home

Sanjay Badani, Mumbai vs. ACIT 10(3), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Sanjay Badani Acit – 10(3) Unit No. 405, Hind Rajasthan Centre, Now Known As 15(2)(1), D. S. Phalke Road, Dadar (E) Vs. Mumbai Mumbai-400 014

given facts, circumstances and judicial pronouncements; Ld. CIT (Appeals) erred in making addition of inter corporate deposits by treating the same as deemed dividend u/s 2(22) (e), such addition is bad in law and erroneous in facts and liable to be deleted. 9. Without prejudice to above ... given facts, circumstances and judicial pronouncements; Ld. CIT (Appeals) erred in making addition of inter corporate deposits by treating the same as deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e), such addition is excessive and liable to be reduced. 10. On the given facts, circumstances and judicial pronouncements; Ld. CIT (Appeals) erred

Sanjay Subhashchand Gupta, Kalyan vs. Dy CIT Central Circle-4, Thane

In the result, this appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Sanjay Subhashchand Gupta Dy. Cit, Central Circle-4, 301 & 401, Atul Baug, Thane Near Saraswat Bank, Kalyan, Vs. Thane-421 301

facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon. C.I.T.(A) has erred in restricting the amount of addition in respect of deemed dividend under section 222Je of Income Tax Act, 1961. 2 Sanjay Subhashchand Gupta vs. Dy. CIT 3. On facts and circumstances of the case ... total income of Rs.1,68,84,582/-, wherein the Assessing Officer (‘A.O.’ for short) made an addition of Rs.99,64,522/-, which amounts to deemed dividend of Rs.52,07,168/- u/s.2(22)(e) of the Act and Rs.47,57,354/- as disallowance towards interest paid. 4. Aggrieved by this