TMI Blog2014 (6) TMI 145X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which such shareholder is member or partner having substantial interest – Relying upon ACIT V. Bhaumik Colour (P) Ltd., 2008 (11) TMI 273 - ITAT BOMBAY-E ] the amount cannot be treated as deemed dividend u/s.2(22)(e) in the hands of the appellant - It is not the case where the Tribunal has made observations on its own - The directions against which the assessee is aggrieved are based on the admission of the assessee before the CIT(A) - there is no error as alleged by the assessee in the order of the Tribunal – Decided against Assessee. - M. P. No. 186/Mds/2013 ( in ITA No. 527/Mds/2011 ) - - - Dated:- 16-5-2014 - Shri A. Mohan Alankamony And Shri Vikas Awasthy,JJ. For the Petitioner : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate For the Respon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ver, the Bench without posed with grounds of appeal by the department in the original appeal proceedings questioning the nature of the amounts received by the Petitioner/Respondent had committed grave mistake in treating such sum as deemed dividend while giving direction to the AO to treat such sum as deemed dividend in the hands of the partners. The Petitioner/Respondent submits that the said finding of the Appellate Tribunal without any challenge by the Appellant before them is clearly tantamount to the exercise of their jurisdiction beyond the scope of the appeal. 2. Shri S. Sridhar, appearing on behalf of the assessee submitted that the Tribunal has exceeded its jurisdiction in directing the Assessing Officer to take necessary steps ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (Appeals) wherein the assessee had conceded that the deemed dividend is taxable in the hands of the shareholders is re-produced herein below: 6.3 The ld.AR has also argued in the alternative, that deemed dividend u/s.2(22)(e) is taxable only in the hands of the shareholders of the company and not in the hands of the appellant firm. I find merit in the submissions of the ld.AR. The appellant has explained that only the partners of the appellant firm are shareholders in the company (EEPL) and not the appellant firm itself. Such being the facts, the case if covered by the decision of the Hon ble Special Bench of Mumbai Tribunal wherein it was held that deemed dividend can be assessee only in the hands of a person who is a shareholder of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
