Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Commissioner of Income Tax Versus M/s. Sunil Mantri Trinity Projects Pvt. Ltd.

2016 (12) TMI 411 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

Application of provisions of section 2(22)(e) - ITAT deleted the addition on deemed dividend - Held that:- Question (i) as framed by the Revenue stands concluded against the Revenue and in favour of the respondent assessee by the decision of this Cou .....

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 assessee, since the amount in question had actually been defalcated and was not reflected in the book of account of the assessee. Even assuming that it was a dividend, it would have to be taxed not in the hand of the assessee but in the hands of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

is undisputed that respondent assessee is not a registered shareholder in the lending company viz. M/s. Sunil Mantri Reality Ltd. - Income Tax Appeal No. 916 of 2014 - Dated:- 29-11-2016 - M. S. Sanklecha And A. K. Menon, JJ. Mr. Suresh Kumar a/w Ms .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he impugned order is in respect of Assessment Year 2008-09. (i) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in confirming the order of CIT(A) that the provisions of section 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

er is a member or a partner and such a shareholder has a substantial interest as defined in Explanation 3(b) of section 2(22)(e) of the Act? (ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstance of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in confi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

idence that the paidup capital of M/s. Sunil Mantri Trinity Projects P. Ltd. during the period is ₹ 50,000/. This is in straight contradiction to the fact that the minimum paidup capital for any closely held company should be ₹ 1,00,000/? .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

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

Go to Mobile Version