Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Shri Ashok Kumar Agarwal Versus The ACIT, Central Circle-3, Jaipur.

Deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) - whether the advances were loan for business purposes or otherwise - Held that:- The prima facie copy of accounts in the books of the company shows that assessee had paid much more than amount received from the company. The transactions were regular. The assessee produced the evidence before the lower authorities to justify the transaction as a business transaction on the basis of agreement to sale dated 22.7.2009. There were certain conditions as per this Ikrarnama .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

been reduced to 10 hectares. The assessee filed application on 23.08.2012 under section 90B of the Land Revenue Act before the JDA which was rejected by the JDA. The case laws relied on by the ld. A/R are squarely applicable on the facts of the case. Therefore, we hold that transactions made by the assessee and the company are for business purposes and are not deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e) of the Act. - Decided in favour of assessee - ITA No. 810/JP/2014 - Dated:- 4-3-2016 - SHRI R.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

d dividend by applying the provisions of section 2(22)(e) of Income Tax Act more so when the payment by M/s. Ashish Buildcon Private Ltd. to the assessee was not in the nature of loans and advances but advance against the sale of the land to the company in the normal course of the business. 2. That the order of the ld. CIT (A), confirming the addition made by the AO is arbitrary, whimsical, capricious, perverse and against the law and facts of the case. The order of ld. CIT (A) in this regard de .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

vt. Ltd. The assessee is having shareholding more than 10% in the said company. It is noticed that assessee company had paid ₹ 1,22,55,000/- as advance to the assessee in the current account through which day to day transactions were being carried out. The assessee was having accumulated reserve and surplus to the tune of ₹ 99,50,794/-. The AO further observed that M/s. Ashish Buildcon Pvt. Ltd is not a company in which the publics are substantially interested. The company had shown .....

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 and a shareholder. He further relied on Hon ble Supreme Court decision in the case of Miss P Sarda vs. CIT, 229 ITR 444 (SC) on deemed dividend. He further relied on in the case of Shyama Charan Gupta vs. CIT, 337 ITR 511 (All) wherein it has been held that amount paid by the company to assessee holding more than 10% shareholding was shown as advance commission payment is deemed dividend since on the date of payment the company did not have any liability to pay commission. Accordingly he .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

with that of company on 22.09.2010. The ld. A/R of the appellant furnished an unregistered Agreement to Sale dated 22.07.2009 between the appellant and the company. It has been submitted that this money was advanced in the normal course of business by company as per the said agreement to sale because it has been given by the company to the appellant as an advance for purchase of land. She held this agreement to sale as unreliable evidence due to it being not registered. During the course of sea .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

4) of the Agreement to Sale wherein it has been provided that if assessee could not get 90B approval by 15.03.2010, then this Agreement to Sale would be deemed to be cancelled and these amounts will be returned back. The ld. CIT (A) presumed that the Ikrarnama was cancelled because sanction under section 90B could not be obtained by Shri Ashok Kumar Agarwal, the seller by 15.03.2010. She also asked the appellant to supply any correspondence undertaken by the appellant for getting the conversion .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

that the use of land was not going to be converted under 90B by 15.03.2010, to that extent this Ikrarnama is void ab-initio. She held that Ikrarnama is nothing but an after thought to justify the loans taken by him from the company as advances for land to escape the deeming provisions of sec. 2(22)(e) of the Act. The return of the company M/s. Ashish Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. was electronically filed on 21.09.2010 i.e. one day prior to the search. In the Notes to Accounts, the Auditor has mentioned tha .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

or which value was still to be received. She has reproduced the Schedule-7 at page 10 of her order. Thus in the return filed by the company a day prior to the search, the transactions as per the Ikrarnama had not been reflected by the company either by way of inclusion of this land in its stock or as an advance recoverable in cash or kind. She relied on the evidences by way of return of the company to hold that the Ikrarnama furnished by the appellant is unreliable evidence. On perusal of the ba .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the case of CIT vs. Creative Dyeing and Printing Pvt. Ltd. ITA No. 250/2009 dated 22.09.2010 and the order of the Income Tax Settlement Commission in the case of M/s. Career Point Infosystems Ltd., Shri Pramod Kumar Maheshwari, Shri Om Prakash Maheshwari and Shri Naval Kishore Maheshwari (S.A.No.RJ/JP 51/2011-12/28 to 31-IT). After examining these orders, she held that case laws referred by the assessee are completely distinguishable from the facts of the case of the appellant. Therefore, the f .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

proceedings could not be got from JDA, the agreement was cancelled and amount was refunded to the company. The assessee is a regular dealer in the land and company is also dealer in the land. The advance transaction is normal business transaction and same cannot be treated as a deemed dividend. He also relied upon Hon ble Delhi High Court decision in case of CIT vs. Creative Dyeing and Printing Pvt Ltd. (supra) before the AO. The ld. A/R also filed copy of Agreement to Sale executed between ass .....

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 receiving advances from the customers and thereafter selling the plots to them. Therefore, this is a general practice of the trade to first receive advances from the customers and thereafter sell the plots/land to them. Since the land under the Agreement to Sale could not be got approved for the purpose of 90B formalities, the agreement was cancelled and amount was refunded to the company. But later on another land was sold to the company by the assessee by executing the registered sale deed 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

attributes of a loan are that it involves the positive act of lending, coupled with acceptance by the other side of the money as loan. It generally carries interest and there is an obligation of repayment. On the other hand, in its widest meaning the term advance may or may not be proved lending, for which he relied on the decision of Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Raj Kumar, 318 ITR 462 (Delhi). Further he relied on the following decisions :- CIT vs. Om Prakash Suri (No.2) 359 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s agreement was unregistered and after thought, has no basis as in this line of business all the land transactions are generally made on agreement to sale to save the stamp duty and increase the profitability on that transaction. Besides this, numbers of formalities are required to be completed to get registry in the name of purchaser. Further, it was observed that during the course of search Agreement to Sale was not found, it is submitted by the ld. A/R that assessments for the A.Y 2004-05, 05 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ares. The ld. A/R referred the Draft Master Plan approved by the JDA and argued that this was the reason for not getting the 90B approval. When land had not got registered in the name of the company, therefore, it could not be included in the closing stock of the company. The balance as on 31.03.2010 was Nil, therefore, this amount has also not been reflected under the head Advance recoverable in cash or in kind. The case law referred by the ld. CIT (A) are totally on different issue and disting .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

assessee in the books of account of the company was ₹ 91.90 lakhs on 10.02.2010. Whereas the ld AO made addition of ₹ 99,50,794/- which is also not justifiable. Accordingly he requested to delete the addition. 5.3. At the outset, the ld. D/R vehemently supported the order of ld. CIT (A) and argued that ld. CIT (A) had discussed and given the finding in this issue in detail after considering each and every aspect on facts and law, therefore, same is required to be upheld. 6. We have .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

pany, ₹ 9.5 lakhs on 28.07.2009, ₹ 3 lakhs on 13.10.2009, ₹ 1.25 lakhs on 15.10.2009, ₹ 5 lakhs on 26.10.2009, ₹ 5 lakhs on 29.10.2009, ₹ 20 lakhs on 10.02.2010 and ₹ 60 lakhs on 10.3.2010 (Rs. 20 lakhs each) and ₹ 13 lakhs on 10.03.2010 and ₹ 1.25 lakhs on 10.3.2010 which show that there are numbers of transactions between the assessee and company. Finally, the assessee s accounts has been squared up. The assessee and company are in real est .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     Latest Happenings     ↓  

News: Notification Issued For GST Actionable Claim On Branded Food Products

News: GST Refund - Blockage of Working Capital of Exporters - earlier also there was a normal blockage of funds for a period of 5-6 months at least

News: Clarification about Transition Credit - ₹ 1.27 lakh crore of credit of Central Excise and Service Tax was lying as closing balance as on 30th June, 2017 - claim of credit of ₹ 65,000 crore is not unexpected

Article: 20 Things You must know about E Way Bills in GST Law

Article: MISTAKES IN DRAFTING

Forum: Duty Drawback- Urgent

Highlight: The Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 2017 and All Industry Rates (AIRs) of Drawback related changes -reg. - Circular

Highlight: The definition of "subsidiary company" or "subsidiary" u/s 2(87) of the Companies Act, 2013 shall come into force w.e.f. 20-9-2017

Highlight: Central Government notified the All Industry Rates of Duty Drawback Schedule w.e.f. 1.10.2017 - Notification

Notification: All Industry Rates of Duty Drawback Schedule w.e.f. 1.10.2017

Circular: Investment by Foreign Portfolio Investors in Corporate Debt Securities Review

Notification: Exemptions on supply of services under UTGST Act

Notification: Rates for supply of services under UTGST Act

Notification: Exemptions on supply of services under IGST Act

Notification: Rates for supply of services under IGST Act

Notification: List of Exempted supply of services under the CGST Act

Notification: Rates for supply of services under CGST Act

Highlight: Acceptance of deposits by companies from its members - conditions relaxed in case of Specified IFSC Public company and a private company - Rule 3 amended

Notification: Rate of exchange of conversion of the foreign currency with effect from 8th September, 2017

News: Tax Payers Advised To Confirm Identities Of Income Tax Search Authorities

Notification: Amendment in Appendix 3 (SCOMET items) to Schedule- 2 of ITC (HS) Classification of Export and Import Items 2012

Forum: GST Invoice

Notification: The Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 2017

Circular: The Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 2017 and All Industry Rates (AIRs) of Drawback related changes -reg.

News: GST implementation smoother than expected: Jaitley

Forum: GST - TRAN1 - filed - Data uploaded with Remarks Processed with Error - Not coming in Electronic credit ledger - need suggession guidance

Forum: 3B mistake

Forum: Input tax credit

Forum: Excise duty credit on finished stock at additional place of business.

Forum: Due date of Filing TRAN-1

Highlight: Diversion of income at source - Joint venture agreement - 97% of the receipt transfer to M/s TRG Industries (P) Ltd. - scope of the agreement - it is diversion by overriding title - not taxable in the hands of assessee - HC

Highlight: Expenditure on eligible projects or schemes u/s 35AC - After 01.04.2017 the legislature desired to withdraw such deduction. - The Union legislature was competent to introduce such amendment - HC

Highlight: Transfer of trading assets at cost price, the profit component also stood transferred to the outgoing Directors, which otherwise belonged to the Company - the fact that AO has made the addition in the hands of the Directors would not make any difference - additions confirmed - HC

Highlight: The interest u/s 234B of the Act cannot go beyond the stage of S.245D(I) before the Settlement Commission - HC

Highlight: Galvanized iron pipe is a different commercial commodity than a iron pipe, therefore the activity of galvanization in our considered opinion amounts to manufacture - Deduction u/s 80-IB allowed - HC

Highlight: Penalty u/s 271C - non deduction of TDS on interest paid to sister concerns in terms of Section 194A - Levy of penalty confirmed - HC

Highlight: Disallowance of interest - reference to section 179 - The legislature has also recognised, that the doctrine of lifting of veil in the matter of tax dues is to be applied to prevent fraud etc. and not where the company has suffered despite its normal bona fide function. - HC

News: RBI Reference Rate for US $

Notification: Amendment in Notification No. S.O. 3118(E), dated the 3rd October, 2016

Highlight: Discount on ESOP to be allowed as business expenditure u/s 37(1), during the years of vesting on the basis of percentage of vesting during such period, subject to upward or downward adjustment at the time of exercise of option.

Notification: Central Government appoints the 20th September, 2017 as the date on which proviso to clause (87) of section 2 of the Companies Act 2013, shall come into force

Notification: Companies (Restriction on number of layers) Rules, 2017

Highlight: Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - additional income disclosure - surrender of income post survey u/s 133A - he disclosure made by the assessee is voluntary in nature, in the revised return - no penalty

Highlight: Reopening of assessment - notice u/s 148 issued on the directions of JCIT / CIT - a perusal of reasons for initiating reassessment proceedings clearly show that they are against the sprit of provisions u/s 147

Highlight: MAT - Adjustment to book profit - computation u/clause (f) of Explanation-1 to section 115JB(2) is to be made without resorting to the computation as contemplated u/s 14A r.w.Rule 8D of I.T. Rules.

Highlight: Addition on account of alleged suppression of service value received - the addition made simply believing the Form 26AS will be an arbitrary exercise of power which cannot be sustained

Notification: Exempts intra state supply of heavy water and nuclear fuels from DAE to NPCIL

Notification: Seeks to amend notification No. 12/2017-UTT(R) to exempt right to admission to the events organised under FIFA U-17 World Cup 2017

Notification: Seeks to amend notification No. 11/2017- UTT(R) to reduce CGST rate on specified supplies of Works Contract Services

Highlight: Liability to pay duty on import of software - Though no authorization was given by the appellant to DHL, it is an undisputed position that the software has, in fact, been ordered by the appellant and have been delivered to them by DHL - the appellant is to be considered as the importer



|| 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