ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SH. ASHOK KUMAR GARG, NEW DELHI
In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed
ITA 2917/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Sept 2015AY 2009-10
Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Smt. Beena A. Pillaiassessment Year: 2009-10 Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Sh. Ashok Kumar Garg, Income Tax, Circle-1(1), N-3, Kailash Colony, New Delhi New Delhi (Pan: Aagpg8032N) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Sh. K.K. Jaiswal, Dr Respondent By : Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. Date Of Hearing: 09.09.2015 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.09.2015 Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, A.M.: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Directed Against The Order Of Cit(A)-Iv, New Delhi, Dated 27.02.2013, Passed For The Assessment Year 2009- 10. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: I. Whether The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred On Facts & In Law In Deleting The Addition Of Rs. 53,29,843/- On Account Of Deemed Dividend U/S 2(22)(E) Ignoring The Fact That The Advances Had Not Been Made In The Ordinary Course Of Business Expediency & The Assessee Had Been Regularly Repaying The Amount Received From The Company. Ii. The Appellant Craves Leave For Reserving The Right To Amend, Modify, Alter, Add Or Forego Any Ground(S) Of Appeal At Any Time Before Or During The Hearing Of This Appeal. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Respondent Assessee Is An Individual Deriving Income From Salary From The Company, Namely, M/S A.K.G. Industries
For Appellant: Sh. K.K. Jaiswal, DRFor Respondent: Sh. Ved Jain, Adv
Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)
Section 2(22)(e) are not applicable. In this connection, he relied on the following decisions of the Tribunal:
M/s Percy Peshotan Batlivala Vs. ITO, ITA No. 4487/Del/2010, Dt. 20th i.
July, 2012; 2012 (9) TMI –ITAT, Delhi
Ishwar Chand Jindal Vs. ACIT, ITA No. 4967/Del/2012, dt, 29th May, ii.
2015; 2015 (8) TMI 119 – ITAT, Delhi
