Contact us   Feedback   Annual Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (3) TMI 630 - ITAT KOLKATA

2016 (3) TMI 630 - ITAT KOLKATA - TMI - Deemed dividend addition u/s 2(22) - whether there was any “Loan or Advance” by PIPL to the Assessee? - Held that:- There is no reason whatsoever to doubt the plea put forth by the Assessee that the sum of ₹ 9 lacs was mistaken paid to RBI in the name of the Assessee instead of PIPL. The reason being that the returned income of the Assessee for the relevant AY was only ₹ 4,26,150/-. The Assessee would get credit of TDS of ₹ 70,480 which w .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

said that there was any “Loan or Advance” by PIPL to the Assessee. The fact that the rents payable by PIPL to the Assessee were adjusted against the monies refundable by the Assessee to PIPL is a matter of adjustment between the parties. That adjustment cannot be the basis to hold that PIPL has given a “ loan or advance” to the Assessee. The primarily requirement of flow of funds for use by the Assessee from PIPL is essential to say that PIPL gave “Loan or Advance” to the Assessee. Such a requi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

enged in this appeal is the addition of ₹ 9 lacs made by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A) invoking the provisions of Sec.2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The provisions of Sec.2(22)(e) of the Act, reads as follows: Sec.2(22) "dividend" includes- (e) Any payment by a company, not being a company in which the public are substantially interested, of any sum (whether as representing a part of the assets of the company or otherwise) made after the 31-5-1987, by way of advance o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ny such shareholder, to the extent to which the company in either case possesses accumulated profits. but "dividend" does not include- (i) a distribution made in accordance with sub-clause (c) or sub-clause (d) in respect of any share issued for full cash consideration, where the holder of the share is not entitled in the event of liquidation to participate in the surplus assets ; (ia) a distribution made in accordance with sub-clause (c) or sub-clause (d) in so far as such distributio .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

any sum previously paid by it and treated as a dividend within the meaning of sub-clause (e), to the extent to which it is so set off; (iv) any payment made by a company on purchase of its own shares from a shareholder in accordance with the provisions of section 77A of the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956); (v) any distribution of shares pursuant to a demerger by the resulting company to the shareholders of the demerged company (whether or not there is a reduction of capital in the demerged compa .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

include all profits of the company up to the date of liquidation, but shall not, where the liquidation is consequent on the compulsory acquisition of its undertaking by the Government or a corporation owned or controlled by the Government under any law for the time being in force, include any profits of the company prior to three successive previous years immediately preceding the previous year in which such acquisition took place. Explanation 3.-For the purposes of this clause,- (a) "conce .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

icial owner of shares, not being shares entitled to a fixed rate of dividend whether with or without a right to participate in profits, carrying not less than twenty percent of the voting power. 3. The provisions of Sec.2(22)(e) treats loan or advance given by a company in which public are not substantially interest as distribution of dividend by the company to its shareholders and chargeable to tax. It is being done to bring within the tax net monies paid by the closely held companies to their .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

imately be dividend in the hands of the shareholder, money in the form of an advance or loan.. Nomenclature of this section which is Deemed Dividend , connotes that this section has been brought on statue as Deeming Fiction . It means that the income termed as dividend is actually not dividend distributed by a closely held company but the amount paid is still treated as dividend and hence the term Deemed Dividend . 4. In the present case the facts are that the Assessee is a partnership firm cons .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Tax for AY 2007-08. It had therefore taken a demand draft for ₹ 9 lacs, bearing No.057467 dated 9.12.2006 in favour of RBI, by debit of its current account No.012010200002293 with Axis Bank, Jamshedpur branch. The same was sent to their auditors at Kolkatta M/S.S.B.Dandeker & Co. The staff of M/S.S.B.Dandeker & Co., one Mr.Raghunandan Dutta, was handed over the aforesaid draft for deposit as advance tax payable by PIPL. He inadvertently prepared the challan in the name of the Asses .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

see in the course of hearing before me. 7. In the meantime PIPL wanted the money from the Assessee. PIPL was a tenant occupying the premises owned by the Assessee. It was agreed between the Assessee and PIPL that by way of adjustment of ₹ 9 lacs payable by the Assessee to PIPL, the Assessee will adjust the annual rent of ₹ 1,08,000 payable by PIPL. As upto AY 2012-13 adjustments were made accordingly. 8. The case of the revenue on the above facts is that there was a loan or advance o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

eason why PIPL should pay advance tax of ₹ 9 lacs on behalf of the Assessee to the credit of the Central Government towards tax liability. There was no flow of funds in favour of the Assessee in the sense that the money paid in RBI remained with the Tax department and did not reach the Assessee. For a transaction of loan or advance , the recipient of the loan or advance should have the benefit of use of the sum given as loan or advance and since the money in question was never available fo .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ference was made to the decision of the Hon ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Raj Kumar Singh & Co. 295 ITR 9 (All), wherein the Hon ble Allahabad High Court held that Clause (e) of s. 2(22) of the Act as it existed clearly provided that if the loan is received by the shareholder, it is only then the said loan can be deemed to be dividend in his hand. In the case before the Hon ble Allahabad High Court, admittedly, the assessee-firm was not the shareholder of the company, M/s Jai Praka .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Ltd. The Hon ble Court also held that it was settled principle of law that the deeming provision has to be construed strictly. The Hon ble Allahabad High Court also referred to the decision in the case of Howrah Trading Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (1959) 36 ITR 215 (SC) and CIT vs. C.P. Sarathy Mudaliar (1972) 83 ITR 170 (SC). In the later decision, s. 2(6A)(e) of the Act, 1922 was under consideration, which was synonymous to s. 2(22)(e) of the IT Act, 1961. In the said case, members of HUF acquired share .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

uot;shareholder" of the company and could not, therefore, be deemed to be its income. The apex Court further held that when the Act speaks of shareholder, it refers to the registered shareholder. The Assessee also placed reliance on the decision of the Special Bench in the case of CIT Vs. Bhaumik colour (P) Ltd. 118 ITD 1 (SB)(Mumbai). 10. The CIT(A) however held that the case of the Assessee would be covered by the provisions of Sec.2(22)( e) of the Act and would within the clause Loan or .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sessee be covered by the provisions of Sec.2(22) ( e) of the Act. The CIT(A) thereafter held as follows: Thus, in my view it is beyond the scope of this appeal to decide on the issue whether the provisions of section 2(22)(e) are applicable in the case of a firm only for the reason that substantial shareholders in the assessee firm also hold substantial stake in the company which made the loan or advance to the assessee firm. The facts regarding the substantial interest of the common partners/sh .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ion of' Shri Raghunandan Dutta working in the office of M/S S.B. Dandekar & Co., Chartered Accountants to the effect that the draft was to be deposited towards the: advance tax of PIPL and was wrongly deposited by preparing the challan in the name of the appellant firm . It was also stated that the appellant firm was not, required to deposit any advance tax which was also a testimony to the fact that the sum was deposited by mistake in the appellant's name. In my view, this declarati .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ing' the proceedings u/s 263 of the Act as to when the sum of ₹ 9 lakhs was actually refunded by the appellant to PIPL to which the appellant replied that the sum was adjusted against rent receivable from PIPL by the appellant. Thus, whatever might have been the actual reason for depositing the sum of ₹ 9 lacs with RBI on behalf of the appellant, in the final analysis it assumed the character of advance payment made to the appellant and as admitted by the appellant in its reply d .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

der of the CIT(A), the Assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. I have heard the submissions of the learned counsel for the Assessee who reiterated the stand of the Assessee as put forth before the CIT(A). The learned DR relied on the order of the CIT(A) and further submitted that the fact that the sum of ₹ 9 lacs paid as advance tax in the name of the Assessee and that it had never been refunded to the Assessee so far is not borne of the records and such a plea was not taken before the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

us becomes clear that there could not be advance tax liability to the extent of ₹ 9 lacs for the Assessee. The contention of the Assessee therefore that the sum in question was mistaken paid to RBI in the name of Assessee instead of PIPL deserves to be accepted. It is a fact that the sum in question i.e., ₹ 9 lacs never reached the hands of the Assessee and was not available for use by the Assessee. In such circumstances can it be said that there was any Loan or Advance by PIPL to th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

at the conditions for applicability of Sec.2(22)( e) of the Act were satisfied. 13. I am also of the view even otherwise the provisions of Sec.2(22)( e) of the Act are not attracted in the facts and circumstances of the present case. The case made out by the CIT(A) was that the case of the Assessee would be covered by the provisions of Sec.2(22)( e) of the Act and would within the clause Loan or Advance by a company to any concern in which such shareholder is a member or a partner and in which h .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

2)( e) of the Act are attracted. This question has been answered by the Special Bench of ITAT Mumbai in the case of Bhaumik Color (P) Ltd. (supra). In the aforesaid decision the Special Bench was concerned with the second limb of Sec.2(22)(e) of the Act, viz., to any concern in which such shareholder is a member or a partner and in which he has a substantial interest . The Special Bench observed that the following conditions are required to be satisfied for application of the above category of p .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

holder referred to in the earlier part of Sec.2(22)(e) viz., a registered and a beneficial holder of shares holding 10% voting power. (c)The very same person referred to in (b) above must also be a member or a partner in the concern holding substantial interest in the concern viz., when the concern is not a company, he must at any time during the previous year, be beneficially entitled to not less than twenty percent of the income of such concern; and where the concern is a company he must be th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

a person other than a shareholder of the lender? The Special Bench held that deemed dividend can be assessed only in the hands of a person who is a shareholder of the lender company and not in the hands of a person other than a shareholder. The Special Bench on the above issue has observed as follows:- 30. At the outset it has to be mentioned that provisions of Sec.2(22)(e) which brought in a new category of payment which was to be considered as dividend as introduced by the Finance Act 1987 w. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e case of CIT Vs. Hotel Hilltop. 217 CTR 527(Raj). The facts of the case before the Hon ble Court were as follows. The Assessee was one M/S.Hotel Hilltop a partnership firm. This firm received an advance of ₹ 10 lacs from a company M/S.Hilltop palace Hotels (P) Ltd. The shareholding pattern of M/S.Hillltop Palace Hotels (P) Ltd., was as follows: 1. Shri Roop Kumar Khurana : 23.33% 2. Smt.Saroj Khurana : 4.67% 3. Vikas Khurana : 22% 4. Deshbandhu Khurana: 25% 5. Shri.Rajiv Khurana : 25% The .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

P) Ltd. To the firm M/S.Hotel Hill Top was treated as deemed dividend in the hands of M/S.Hotel Hill Top, the firm under the Second limb of Sec.2(22)(e) of the Act. The CIT(A) held that since the firm was not the shareholder of the company the assessment as deemed dividend in the hands of the firm was not correct. The order of the CIT(A) was confirmed by the Tribunal. On Revenue s appeal before the Hon ble High Court, the following question of law was framed for consideration:- Whether on the fa .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ompany, on behalf or for the individual benefit of any such shareholder ……. Thus, the substance of the requirement is that the payment should be made on behalf of or for the individual benefit of any such shareholder, obviously, the provision is intended to attract the liability of tax on the person, on whose behalf, or for whose individual benefit, the amount is pad by the company, whether to the shareholder, or to the concerned firm. In which event, it would fall within the expre .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

dend would not be deemed dividend in the hands of the firm, rather it would obviously be deemed dividend in the hands of the individuals, on whose behalf, or on whose individual benefit, being such shareholder, the amount is paid by the company to the concern. Thus, the significant requirement of section 2(22)(e) is not shown to exist. The liability of tax, as deemed divided, could be attracted in the hands of the individuals, being the shareholders, and not in the hands of the firm. 32. The afo .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ot correct. 15. The Special Bench further held as follows:- 34. We are of the view that the provisions of Sec.2(22)(e) does not spell out as to whether the income has to be taxed in the hands of the shareholder or the concern(non-shareholder). The provisions are ambiguous. It is therefore necessary to examine the intention behind enacting the provisions of Sec.2(22)(e) of the Act. 35. The intention behind enacting provisions of section 2(22)(e) are that closely held companies (i.e. companies in .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

f of or for the individual benefit of such shareholder. In such an event, by the deeming provisions such payment by the company is treated as dividend. The intention behind the provisions of section 2(22)(e) is to tax dividend in the hands of shareholder. The deeming provisions as it applies to the case of loans or advances by a company to a concern in which it s shareholder has substantial interest, is based on the presumption that the loan or advances would ultimately be made available to the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rn can drawn the same from the concern instead of the company directly making payment to the shareholder as dividend. The source of power to control the affairs of the company and the concern is the basis on which these provisions have been made. It is therefore proper to construe those provisions as contemplating a charge to tax in the hands of the shareholder and not in the hands of a non-shareholder viz., concern. A loan or advance received by a concern is not in the nature of income. In othe .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

larges the meaning of the term Dividend according to its ordinary and natural meaning to include even a loan or advance. Any loan or advance cannot be dividend according to its ordinary and natural meaning. The ordinary and natural meaning of the term dividend would be a share in profits to an investor in the share capital of a limited company. To the extent the meaning of the word Dividend is extended to loans and advances to a shareholder or to a concern in which a shareholder is substantially .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ction to a case of loan or advance to a non-shareholder also, we are of the view that loan or advance to a non-shareholder cannot be taxed as Deemed Dividend in the hands of a non-shareholder. 16. The aforesaid view has since been approved in several decisions rendered by Hon ble High Court of Bombay and Delhi in the case of CIT Vs. Universal Medicare Pvt. Ltd., 324 ITR 263 (Bom) and CIT Vs. Ankitech Pvt.Ltd. & others 340 ITR 14 (Del.). Since the Assessee in the present case is not a shareho .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version