9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 1825X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of CIT(A)-2, Nashik dated 30.06.2016 for the Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The grounds raised by the Revenue are as under :- "i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A)-2, Nashik was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 2,48,73,753/- on account of deemed dividend? ii) Whether the Ld. CIT(A) should have considered that the assessee himself is proffering va ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rutiny assessment proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Act, the Assessing Officer made the said addition of Rs. 2,48,73,753/- u/s 2(22)(e) of the Act relating to "deemed dividend". In the assessment order, the Assessing Officer mentioned that the assessee held 79.17% of shares of the company in M/s Viraj Estates Private Limited. The company paid advances to the assessee amounting to Rs. 2.35 crores. Ther ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issue was adjudicated by the CIT(A) in favour of the assessee relying on the judgment of Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Pradeep Kumar Malhotra vs. CIT, 338 ITR 538. The operational part given by the CIT(A) in para 10.2 of his order. In the said judgement, the fact of the case is that a shareholder mortgaged his property for acquiring loan from bank. The facts are similar to that of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8. We have heard both sides on this limited issue of invoking the provisions of section 2(22)(e) of the Act in respect of the loans/advances given by the company to the assessee, when the assessee mortgaged his property as a guarantee for the company to take loan of higher amount from the banks. In the process, the assessee gave up his rights on the property. Therefore, taking advance of Rs. 2.35 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... enue that the loan taken by the assessee from the company constitutes gratuitous advances. The facts of the company taking loan from the Bank against the guarantee of property of the assessee and given loan of Rs. 2.35 crore to the assessee are undisputed. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the decision given by the CIT(A) in his order is fair and reasonable and does not call for any interferen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
