TMI Blog2016 (3) TMI 313X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ldings Pvt. Ltd..- Decided in favour of assessee - ITA No. 4788/MUM/2014 - - - Dated:- 29-1-2016 - SHRI JASON P. BOAZ (AM) AND SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (JM For The Appellant : Shri. Nishit Gandhi For The Respondent : Shri. Rajiv Pant. ORDER PER JASON P. BOAZ, AM This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the CIT -17, Mumbai dt. 19/05/2014 for Asst. year 2011-12. 2. The facts of the case, briefly, are as under:- 2.1 The assessee company engaged in dealing all kinds of fashion products etc. filed its return of income for Asst. year 2011-12 on 21/09/2011 declaring income of ₹ 6,53,43,040/-. The return was processed u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act ) and the case was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e appellant humbly prays that the impugned addition made by the CIT (A) be deleted, in the interest of natural justice. 2. Against addition of ₹ 50,000/- as deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) of the Act The CIT (A) has erred in upholding an addition of ₹ 50,000/- u/s 2(22)(e) of the Act made by the AO without considering the facts of the case. The CIT (A) should have appreciated that the said sum of ₹ 50,000/- represents mere repayment of expenses incurred by the appellant for and on behalf of Tainwala Trading and Investment Co. Pvt. Ltd (TTICPL) during the year under consideration. The CIT (A) failed to appreciate that since no loan or advance has been received by the appellant from TTICPL during the year, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4.3.1 We have heard both parties and perused and carefully considered the material on record; including the judicial decision cited. The addition, which is the subject matter of appeal, is ₹ 26,70,073/-, comprising of two limbs, namely an amount of ₹ 26,21,073/- purported to have been received by M/s. Tainwala Holdings and a sum of ₹ 50,000/- representing amount received from Tainwala Trading and Investment Co. Ltd. The former addition is agitated by way of ground of appeal no. 1 and the latter is agitated by way of ground of appeal no. 2 before us. 4.3.2 With respect to the addition of ₹ 26,21,073/- considered as deemed dividend u/s 2 (22)(e) of the Act, we find that the similar factual matter of an addition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the judgment of the Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Universal Medicare Pvt. Ltd. (supra) is liable to be upheld, thereby resulting in deletion of an addition of ₹ 28,74,875/- in the hands of the assessee company. Accordingly, we set aside the order of CIT(A) on this aspect and direct the Assessing Officer to delete the addition of ₹ 28,74,875/- made in the hands of the assessee on the ground that such dividend could not be taxed in the hands of the assessee as it is not a shareholder in M/s. Tainwals Holding Pvt. Ltd. 4.3.2 Respectfully following the decision of the co-ordinate bench of this Tribunal in the assessee s own case for Asst. year 2010-11 in ITA No. 388/Mum/2014 dt. 21/08/2015, wherein the ratio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
