TMI Blog2014 (4) TMI 825X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sion in the assessment order, the ground also suffers from the same error - the assessee had executed work for the company in the nature of construction of buildings and the said transaction being in the nature of a simple business transaction – there is no justifiable ground to bring the case of the assessee within the definition of deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) of the Act – Decided against Revenue. - Tax Case (Appeal) No. 898 of 2013 - - - Dated:- 16-4-2014 - Chitra Venkataraman And T. S. Sivagnanam,JJ. For the Appellant : Mr. T. Ravikumar Standing Counsel for Income Tax Department JUDGMENT (The Judgment of the Court was made by Chitra Venkataraman.J.,) Revenue seeks admission of the Tax Case (Appeal) relating to the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rom Vista Securities Technics Pvt.Ltd. Applying the decisions of the Mumbai High Court reported in (1973) 92 ITR 105 [CIT vs. Jamunadas Khrimji Kothari] and the Apex Court reported in (1998) 229 ITR 444[ Miss.P.Sarada vs. CIT] , the Assessing Officer however, held that an amount of Rs.87,57,297/- was liable to be treated as deemed dividend at the hands of the assessee. 3. Aggrieved by this, the assessee went on appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) who agreed with the assessee that he was rendering services to his client M/s.Southern Academy Maritime Studies P.Ltd. by constructing building; that the advance money received was towards construction of the building for the said private limited company. The assessee produce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he issue in assessee's favour. In the course of considering the merits of the assessee's case as well as the Revenue's case, the Tribunal pointed out that the Assessing Officer, in one place had stated that the amounts were received by the assessee from the Southern Academy of Maritime Studies Pvt.Ltd., whereas in para No.4.2, of the Assessment order he mentioned about another company in the name of M/s.Vista Securities Technics Pvt.Ltd., which clearly pointed out that the Assessing Officer was not clear as to from which company, the assessee had received this amount. Thus, the Tribunal rejected the Revenue's appeal. Hence the present appeal by the Revenue. 5. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Revenue submitted t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
