9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (8) TMI 514X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ccount of deemed dividend without appreciating that the said addition was not wan-anted on facts and in law. 2. The learned CIT(A) erred In holding that the amount of Rs. 30,00,000/-advanced by the company, M/s. B.T. Kadlag Construction Pvt. Ltd. [BTKCPL] wherein the assessee is a substantial shareholder to the firm, M/s. Renuka Construction, wherein the assessee is a partner having substantial interest is to be treated as deemed dividend within the meaning of section 2(22)(e) of the Act. 3. The learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the assessee had mortgaged his personal assets having market value of more than Rs. 42 lacs for the purposes of obtaining finance for the company, BTKCPL and hence, the amount of Rs. 30 lacs advanced by B ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mhan (died) [236 ITR 327] wherein it has been held that any legal fiction has to be carried to its logical conclusion and hence, following the said ratio und considering the intention of Legislature behind introducing the deeming provisions of section 2(22)(e), only the amount of 25% of the total loan advanced by the company to the firm M/s. Renuka Construction should have been considered as deemed dividend in the hands of the appellant. 7. The appellant craves, leave to add, alter, amend and delete any of the above grounds of appeal." 2. At the time of hearing through video conference, the Ld. AR of the assessee submitted that grounds No.1 and 7 are general in nature. In view of the submissions of the Ld. AR, no adjudication is required ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al income at Rs. 65,46,618/- by making addition of Rs. 30,00,000/- u/s.2(22)(e) of the Act on account of deemed dividend. 5. That on perusal of the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeal), we find that there was no representation at the time of hearing before the Ld. CIT(Appeal) by the assessee in person nor through his Authorized Representative and neither any written submissions were filed. This is evident from Para 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3 of the Ld. CIT(Appeal)‟s order. The Ld. CIT(Appeal) after considering the assessment order, facts of the case and materials available on record as per annexures to Form-35 has passed the appellate order confirming the addition on account of deemed dividend u/s.2(22)(e) of the Act. 6. The Ld. AR of the assessee pl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly argued that in spite of giving several opportunities to the assessee by the Ld. CIT(Appeal), the assessee has not complied with the notices of hearing nor has cared for appearing before the First Appellate Authority for prosecuting his appeal. The Ld. DR has placed strong reliance on the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeal) and submitted that while upholding the addition made by the Assessing Officer, the Ld. CIT(Appeal) referred to plethora of judgments, of which, some of them are of the Hon‟ble Apex Court in which there is no reference to the referred judgments of the Ld. AR and facts are also substantially different. 7.1 That further whether the facts of the assessee‟s case are identical to the facts of the referred judgments by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
