Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2015 (10) TMI 1608

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... eemed dividend can be made applicable only in the hands of the registered shareholders. Since, admittedly, in the present case, the appellant is not a shareholder of M/s. Countrywide Promoters P. Ltd. the amount of ₹ 1,73,262 cannot be taxed in the hands of the appellant-company. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 6302 /Del/2013 - - - Dated:- 10-6-2015 - SHRI G.C. GUPTA AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, JJ. For the Appellant : Sh. V.S. Rastogi, AR For the Respondent : Sh. T. Vasanthan, Sr. DR ORDER Inturi Rama Rao (Accountant Member).- This is an appeal for the assessment year 2005-06 filed by the assessee-company against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), dated August 26, 2013 o .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nds of appeal on or before the date of hearing of the appeal. 2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the return of income for the assessment year 2005-06 was filed on October 31, 2005, declaring total income at ₹ 39,04,210. The return was processed under section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short the Act ) and subsequently the case was selected for scrutiny. The assessment was completed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-11, New Delhi on December 28, 2007 at a total income of ₹ 8,98,94,480. While doing so, the Assessment Officer made additions of ₹ 84,993 and ₹ 1,73,261 on account of deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e) of the Act. The short facts leading to these additions are th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Income-tax (Appeals), the appellant had come up before us with the present appeal. 3. The learned authorised representative vehemently argued that the provisions of section 2(22)(e) of the Act have no application to the case, inasmuch as, the appellant is not a shareholder of M/s. Countrywide Promoters P. Ltd. having an interest of 10 per cent. per annum in the said company. In support of this, the appellant filed a list of shareholders of M/ s. Countrywide Promoters P. Ltd. vide page 16 of the paper book. When the appellant-company is not a registered shareholder of M/s. Countrywide Promoters P. Ltd., the provisions of section 2(22)(e) of the Act have no application to the appellant. In support of this, the learned authorised representa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates