2011 (10) TMI 728

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Arun Dewan, Sr. DR Assessee by : Shri Prakash Jain O R D E R PER JOGINDER SINGH By way of the present appeal the revenue challenges the order dated 17.6.2010 of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) deleting the addition of ₹ 29,14,141/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of deemed dividend income u/s 2(22)(e) of the Act whereas by way cross objection the assessee ch .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ang was a beneficial owner of shares of "Super Galvanised Sheets Private Limited" to the extent of 6.73% in the capacity of Yograj Narang HUF. The assessee in his individual capacity was holding 5.4% shares of the aforesaid same company. The stand of the Assessing Officer is that the assessee was beneficial owner of more than 10% shares, therefore, the provisions of section 2(22)(e) of the Act are .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e holdings of individual with the HUF. The HUF shares are 6.73% whereas individual shares are 5.40% of the total issued capital. Even in JCIT v. Kunal Organics Private Limited; 164 Taxman 169 (Ahd) it was held that individual and HUF are two different entities and, therefore, their share holdings cannot be clubbed for applying provisions of section 2(22)(e) of the Act. Identical ratio was laid dow .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X