9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 950X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in treating a sum of Rs. 16,01,172/- as assessable in the hands of the assessee as salary income. 3. In brief, the relevant facts are that the assessee individual is a director of M/s. Aryaman Financial Services Limited, a public limited company under the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter called as the 'company'). In the course of assessment proceedings the Assessing Officer noted that during the year under consideration, assessee had received a sum of Rs. 16,09,472/- from the company between the period from 21/06/2010 to 21/03/2011 and then the amount was reversed. In the assessment order, it is noted by the Assessing Officer that on being show-caused, the representative of the assessee submitted that the amounts were received towards sala ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... whereas it is a case of pure temporary loan which have been refunded. Apart there from, the Ld. Representative for the assessee pointed out that there was inadequacy of profits in the hands of the company and, therefore, on that score also there was no justification to infer that the amounts were disbursed by the company as salaries. In this context, reference has been made to the copy of the Audited accounts, the copies placed at pages 73 to 92 of the Paper Book and also to the relevant provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 dealing with the managerial remuneration to the Directors, etc. 4.1 At the time of hearing, it has been pointed out that in the last year also, similar payments were made by the company to the assessee, but the Assessi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... present which could justify the characterization of the said amount as salary. Firstly, the payments have been made on varying dates between 21/06/2010 to 21/03/2011. Secondly, even the amounts vary and the payments have not been subject to any tax deduction at source, which would normally the position if the payments were in the nature of salary. Thirdly, there is no material to suggest that any Board of Director's resolution was available permitting the company to pay salary to the assessee -director. In fact, before the CIT(A) assessee referred to a resolution passed in the meeting of the Board of Directors of the company dated 25/04/2011, which approved the salary payment to the assessee-director for the financial year 2011-12, which c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
