“deemed dividend”

DCIT 15(2)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Madhu India Deco Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Amarjit Singhdcit-15(2)(2) Vs. M/S Madhu India Deco Room No. 357, 3Rd Floor, Limited, 20/21, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Navnandavan Indl Estate, Road, Marine Lines, L.B.S Marg, Mulund Mumbai – 400 020 (West), Mumbai – 400 080 स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Aadcp1825G Respondent .. Appellant

circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred deleting the addition of Rs. 1,50,00,000/ of deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(2). 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition ... case are discussed while adjudicating the grounds of appeal filed by the revenue as under: (1) Addition of Rs.1,50,00,000/- of deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) of the Act: 3. During the course of assessment the A.O noticed that assessee received Inter corporate loans amounting to Rs.1

Rekha A Barot, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT CC 9 (2)(1), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2006-07 Rekha A. Barot, Dcit Central Circle-9(2)(1), 1, Ground Floor, Bharat Corporate 6Th Floor, Room No. 659, Avenue, Near Versova Police Station, Vs. Income Tax, D.N. Nagar, Andheri (West) Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400053. Pan No. Aenpb 5677 H Appellant Respondent

further erred in treating the trade advance as a loan and treating the trade advance as a loan and considered the same as deemed dividend in the hands of your considered the same as deemed dividend in the hands of your considered the same as deemed dividend in the hands ... Officer, the said advances therefore, according to the Assessing Officer, the said advances therefore, according to the Assessing Officer, the said advances qualify for deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) of the Act. Whereas qualify for deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) of the Act. Whereas qualify for deemed dividend

Shri Ajay Virendra Arora, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC-6(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Bleshri Ajay Virender Arora V. Dcit – Central Circle – 6(4) S-14, 6Th Floor Room No. 1925, 19Th Floor Solitaire Corporate Park Air India Building, Nariman Guru Govindji Marg, Chakala Point, Mumbai – 400 021 Andheri (E), Mumbai-400093 Pan: Addpa6742R (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit – Central Circle – 6(4) V. Shri Ajay Virender Arora Room No. 1925, 19Th Floor S-14, 6Th Floor Air India Building, Nariman Solitaire Corporate Park Point, Mumbai – 400 021 Guru Govindji Marg, Chakala Andheri (E), Mumbai-400093 Pan: Addpa6742R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Jitendra Jain & Shri Ravikanth Pathak Department By : Smt. Shailja Rai

business of the company, in most part of the year the company owed to the assessee. Therefore these transactions cannot be termed as deemed dividend u/s. U/s. 2(22)(e) of the Act . However, Assessing Officer rejected the submissions of the assessee and proceeded to make the addition ... assessee on 07.03.2018. Ld. AR took us through the statement recorded and submitted that Assessing Officer has not raised any query regarding issue of deemed dividend u/s. 2(22)(e) of the Act or anything to do shareholding of the Company. It clearly indicates that Assessing Officer has made

Shreerang Prakash Chikhalikar, Mumbai vs. ITO-1(3)(2), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Amarjit Singhshreerang Prakash Vs. Ito – 1(3)(2) Chikhalikar,501, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Sugan, Cumballa Hill Bhavan, M.K.Road, Road, Grant Road, Mumbai – 400020. Mumbai – 400036. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Acdpc3706G Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri.Dm Shah.Ar Respondent By : Shri.Anoop Hiwase.Dr Date Of Hearing 29.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 05.07.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Cit(A)- National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Passed U/S 143(3) & 250 Of The Act. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition made u/s.2(22)(e) of the IT Act of Rs.70,41,658/- as deemed dividend being bad in law and contrary to the facts and evidence on record the appellant prays that, the addition of Rs.70,41,658/- be deleted. Shreerang Prakash ... earlier year and made the disallowance of interest to the extent of Rs.24,84,109/-. 4. The second disputed issue is in respect of deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) of the Act, the A.O found that the assessee has maintained three bank accounts and explained the sources of credits

Jp Morgan Funds, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) 3(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed

taken into account while computing capital gains, if any. 2.3 Given the above ruling, since the bonus debentures allotted by BDEL is regarded as 'deemed dividend' and taxed accordingly, it should be excluded while computing capital gains, if any, at the time of sale of such debentures. Further, unless ... appointed by the Board on behalf of and as agent and Assessment Year: 2015-16 Page 4 of 5 trustee of the Members as deemed dividend within the meaning of the term under Section 2(22)(b) of the Income tax Act, 1961 ("the Act”) and also discharged its liability

Dealmoney Securities Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT- CC - 5(2), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Dealmoney Securities Pvt. Ltd., V. Dcit – Central Circle – 5(2) Plot No. A-356/357, Road No. 26 Room No. 1908, 19Th Floor Near Wagle Bus Deopt, Wagle Estate Air India Building, Nariman Point Thane – 400604 Mumbai – 400 021 Pan: Aaccd2614A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : None Department By : Shri M.P. Ahuja

this regard the assessee was show caused as to why the loan amount received by the assessee company should not be treated as deemed dividend u/s.2(22)(e) of the Act. In response assessee submitted that the loan availed from DDASPL is in the ordinary course of business ... working capital loan. With regard to loan from DCPL assessee submitted that no addition 4 M/s. Dealmoney Securities Pvt. Ltd., on account of deemed dividend can be made in the hands of the assessee and addition can be made only in the hands of the shareholder. In this regard

Mukesh Shivdas Sonar, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Central-3, Thane

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for A

completed for A.Y.2014-15 on 20/09/2016 determining total income of the assessee at Rs.2,39,12,770/- after making addition in respect of deemed dividend u/s. 2(22)(e) of the Act in the sum of Rs.88,99,265/- (50% of loan of Rs.1 ... erred in upholding the addition of Rs. 19,61,500/- u/s 2(22)(e) of the I. T. Act, 1961 as deemed dividend on account of advance by M/s. MAAD Realtors & Infra Ltd. to M/s. D.M. Logistic Pvt. Ltd. not appreciating that the said advance was towards acquisition of developable

Mukesh Shivdas Sonar, Mumbai vs. ACIT CC-3, Thane

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for A

completed for A.Y.2014-15 on 20/09/2016 determining total income of the assessee at Rs.2,39,12,770/- after making addition in respect of deemed dividend u/s. 2(22)(e) of the Act in the sum of Rs.88,99,265/- (50% of loan of Rs.1 ... erred in upholding the addition of Rs. 19,61,500/- u/s 2(22)(e) of the I. T. Act, 1961 as deemed dividend on account of advance by M/s. MAAD Realtors & Infra Ltd. to M/s. D.M. Logistic Pvt. Ltd. not appreciating that the said advance was towards acquisition of developable

Zeeshan Azizmohmed Shaikh, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer - Ward 4(5), Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the action of the Learned Assessing Officer in making addition on account of deemed dividend U/s. 2(22)(e) of the Act out of advance taken by the appellant to the tune of Rs. 28,53,251/- for business purposes ... raised in assessee’s appeal are dismissed. 11. The next issue arising in present appeal is with regard to addition made on account of deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e) of the Act. 12. The brief facts of the case pertaining to this issue, as emanating from the records

Income Tax Officer 20(2)(3), Mumbai vs. Mr.Khalid Mustafa Vasaiwala, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey () & Shri Gagan Goyal ()

deleting R.29,94,481/- which was added by the Assessing Officer under section 2(22)(e) of the Act terming the same as deemed dividend. 10. Brief facts as per the Assessing Officer is that the assessee has taken a loan of Rs.1,07,66,483/- from M/s Hicons Dovelopers ... advance is not in regular course of business activity and, therefore, he was of the opinion that the loan given to the assessee is deemed dividend and since the reserves and surplus of the company is at Rs.21,91,481/- as on 31/03/2014, he restricted the addition 8 ITA 4259/Mum/2018

Rekha A Barot, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT CC 9 (2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Blerekha A. Barot V. Dcit – 9(2)(1) 1, Ground Floor Room No. 659, 6Th Floor Bharat Corporate Avenue Income Tax Near Versova Police Station Mumbai - 400020 D.N. Nagar, Andheri (W) Mumbai - 400053 Pan: Aenpb5677H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Dalpat Shah Department By : Shri T. Shankar

assessment was completed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 153A of the Act on 15.12.2009 making an addition on account of deemed dividend u/s. 2(22)(e) of the Act on “protective basis”in the hands of the assessee for ₹.25,00,000/- the substantive addition was made in the hands ... jurisdictional tribunal, addition on substantive basis was deleted in the hands of M/s, BIEL. Issue as to whether the amounts received are taxable as deemed dividend in the hands of shareholder is to be 4 Rekha A. Barot decided on merits now in the case of the Ms. Rekha Barot

M/S Parthiv Enterprises, Mumbai vs. ITO 17(2)(5), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby ordered to be dismissed

Bench: Shri Amar Jit Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Parthiv Enterprises, Ito-17(2)(5), 83 Ramesh Bhuvan Nakhoda Room No.123-A, 1St Floor, Street, Vs. Pydhonie, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai – 400 003 Mumbai – 400 020 Pan: Aaefp8201A (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri R.A. Dhyani, Sr. A.R. Date Of Hearing : 22.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.04.2022 O R D E R Per Amar Jit Singh: The Assessee Has Filed The Above Mentioned Appeal Against The Order Dated 11.03.2019 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Cit(A)] For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: “1. The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Disallowing The Interest Free Loans Of Rs.3,35,23,178/- Out Of Rs.12,19,54,637/- & Thereby Erred In Treating The Same As Loans Taken For Non-Business Purposes. 2. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Disallowing & Adding The Proportionate Interest Paid Of Rs.22,24,357/- Out Of The Total Interest Paid Of Rs.80,92,036/- To The Total Income Of The Assessee & Thereby Added The Same To The Total Income Of The Assessee & Thereby Erred In Treating The Same For Non Business Purpose. 3. The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Of The Genuine Loan Received From The Mis K.C. Kapadia & Sons(P) Ltd Of Rs.39,34,639/- To The Total Income Of The Assessee & Thereby Erred In Treating The Same For Non-Business Purpose.

substantial interest in borrowing company, amount of loan given by lender company to borrower company was rightly added to assessee's taxable income as deemed dividend. Going by the above analogy, the pattern of the inter-se holding pattern of shareholding and voting rights in the company M/s. K.C. Kapadia

Yogesh Mehra, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 3(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm Yogesh Mehra, The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Flat No. 201 Krishna Presidency Tax, Central Circle-3(1), Air India Society North South Road No.8, Vs. Bldg. 19Th Flr, Mumbai-400 021 Vile Parle West, Mumbai-400 049 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaapm6139N

payments made/received and only journal entries were passed and if found correct delete the addition of Rs. 1,64,85,310/- on account of deemed dividend made by the AO in respect of transaction between WWIL/EIL with 6 related companies despite the fact that the ledger accounts were available before ... assessee filed return on 11.08.2014 at Rs. 2,16,52,008/-. During the course of assessment proceedings, assessee was asked explanation on taxability of deemed dividend. Assessee submitted that [1] he is not the recipient of loan [2] Loans are business advances [3] Advances are through journal entries and therefore