Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2021 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (4) TMI 54 - AT - Income TaxDeemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) - loan advanced to the shareholder - HELD THAT:- CIT(A) held that the provisions of section 2(22)(e) were not applicable in the case of the assessee as the said loan was advanced to the shareholder in the ordinary course of business of lending of money by the said company. DR could not point out any defect in the said observations made by the CIT(A).There is no merit in this ground of Revenue. The findings of the ld. CIT(A) on this issue are accordingly upheld. Addition u/s 56(2)(viia) - HELD THAT:- CIT(A) considering the above submissions observed that since the assessee company was 100% subsidiary of M/s Alpine Commercial Co. Ltd. in which the public was substantially interested, therefore according to the provisions of section 2(18)(b)(B)(c), the assessee company being 100% of subsidiary of the said public limited company was also treated as a company in which public was substantially interested and that the provisions of section 56(2)(viia) were not attracted in the case of the assessee company. DR could not bring out any defect in the order of the CIT(A) warranting our interference. The findings of the CIT(A) on this issue are upheld. Addition u/s 14A on account of expenditure incurred for earning of tax exempt income - HELD THAT:- CIT(A) while deleting the aforesaid addition has observed that the assessee during the year did not earn any tax exempt income. He while relying upon the decisions of the various High Courts including the decision in the case of CIT vs. Shivam Motors Pvt. Ltd.. [2014 (5) TMI 592 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] and in the case of Corrtech Energy P. Ltd. [2014 (3) TMI 856 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] held that when there is no exempt income earned by the assessee, no disallowance of corresponding/notional expenditure is to be made under the provisions of section 14A of the Income Tax Act. DR could not point out any infirmity in the order of CIT(A) in this respect. The findings of the ld. CIT(A) on this ground are, therefore, upheld.
|