Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2019 (1) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (1) TMI 1017 - HC - Income TaxDeemed dividend addition u/s 2(22)(e) - member/shareholder of the concerned company where from loan/advance received - Held that:- The issue as to applicability of said provision to a non-member/ non-shareholder of the concerned company which has given the loan/advance has been settled by the decision in “CIT Vs. M/s Ankitech Pvt. Ltd and others [2011 (5) TMI 325 - DELHI HIGH COURT] - thus we do not perceive any illegality in the findings arrived by the Commissioner, Income Tax (Appeals) and affirmed by the Tribunal that the assessee being not a member/shareholder of the concerned company the loan/advance received from such company is not deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) of the Act of 1961. Addition on account of income from house property as per the provisions of Section 22 read with Section 23 - Held that:- The “reasonable rent” can only be the “standard rent” which is in syntax with the “municipal valuation” (for an authority please see Dewan Daulat Rai Kapoor Vs. NDMC [1979 (12) TMI 3 - SUPREME COURT] ; Mrs. Sheila Kaushish Vs. CIT [1981 (8) TMI 1 - SUPREME COURT] and Amolak Ram Khosla Vs. CIT [1981 (8) TMI 3 - SUPREME COURT]. In view whereof, there being a concurrent findings of fact, we perceive no illegality as would give rise to a substantial question of law. Addition u/s 40A - payments made to specified persons on rates more that fair market rates - Held that:- Unless established on facts that the payment for such expenditure was excessive or unreasonable having regard to fair market value, it cannot be disallowed. In the case at hand, no such facts are available, nor commended at. There being pure findings of fact, duly concurred, no substantial question of law arises for consideration. - Revenue appeal dismissed.
|