2016 (12) TMI 1852

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... h. Sharad Agarwal and Ms. Sumangla, Saxena, Advocates. ORDER The question of law sought to be urged in this appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereafter "the Act"] is whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) acted correctly in holding that Section 2(22)(e) of the Act was inapplicable in the circumstances of the case. We notice at the outset that there is a delay of 2 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... xt of Section 2(22)(e) does not authorise the treatment of the amounts as a loan to a shareholder since concededly the amounts were not received by the assessee, an individual. This conclusion is supported by the decision of this Court in CIT v. Ankitech (P). Ltd. & Ors. 2012 (340) ITR 14. No substantial question of law arises. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.
Case laws, Decisions, Judgem .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X