Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2018 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (10) TMI 1998 - ITAT CHANDIGARHDeemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) - assessee received a loan from company in which assessee is the beneficial owner of shares holding more than 10% of shares in the said company - HELD THAT:- As find that the amounts have been indeed received by Barkley Retails Pvt. Ltd. which can be considered as a trade advance. Thus we find that, the observation of the CIT(A) that the advance was utilized for personal purpose and not for meeting the business expediency is based on wrong interpretation of the facts. Hence placing reliance on the judgment of Bagmare Constructions Pvt. Ltd.[2015 (1) TMI 403 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] addition made is hereby directed to be deleted. Disallowance u/s 14A - as argued During the year the assessee has not earned any exempt income - AO has disallowed an amount u/s 14A which the CIT(A) has confirmed - HELD THAT:- As in the case of CIT Faridabad v. Lakhani Marketing INC [2014 (7) TMI 44 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] have held that the disallowance u/s 14A can be made only to the extent of receipt of dividend income. Since in the instant case the assessee has not earned any exempt income no disallowance u/s 14A is warranted. Appeal of the Assessee is allowed.
|