TMI Blog2022 (4) TMI 1017X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... setting up Wind farm and therefore, there is loan and advances in the land holder companies for business purposes. While holding so, the co-ordinate Bench also relied on several judicial precedents as well as CBDT Circular No. 19/2017 dated 12.06.2017. Further, following the same decision of co-ordinate Bench in assessee s own case for AY 2012-13 [ 2021 (12) TMI 1335 - ITAT MUMBAI] ITAT has also deleted the identical addition. Departmental Representative could not show us any reason that how those decisions are not applicable in case of assessee for this year. Further, the CBDT has also taken a view vide CBDT Circular No. 19/2017 dated 12.06.2017 stating that where loans and advances are in the nature of commercial transactions, wou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... edger accounts of WWIL/EIL in the books of 6 related concerns for ascertaining the claim of the appellant that there are no actual payments made/received and only journal entries were passed and if found correct delete the addition of ₹ 1,64,85,310/- on account of deemed dividend made by the AO in respect of transaction between WWIL/EIL with 6 related companies despite the fact that the ledger accounts were available before the AO during the course of assessment proceedings and the same were also filed before the Ld. CIT(A) instead of deleting the addition of ₹ 1,60,00,893/- made by the AO. 3. The appellant prays before the Hon'ble Tribunal to delete the addition of ₹ 1,64,85,313/- made by the AO by invoking the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssing Officer after considering the explanation of the assessee invoked the Provisions of Section 2(22)(e) of the Act and made addition on substantive basis in the hands of the assessee and his mother and further made additions on protective basis in the hands of 6 related concerns, who received loans. The learned Assessing Officer on 28.06.2017 passed assessment under section 143(3) read with section 153A of the Act, wherein addition of ₹ 1,60,50,281/- was made in the hands of the assessee on substantive basis. 04. The assessee preferred the appeal before the learned CIT(A). The learned CIT(A) rejected the contention of the assessee that the loans and advances are business advances. He further directed ld AO to examine contention ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... this matter in favour of the assessee. 08. The learned Authorised Representative further referred to the paper book containing 71 pages filed before us wherein the various ledger accounts of the companies to whom loans were given are filed, which shows that these are merely journal entries. He therefore submitted that on that count also, the addition under section 2(22)(e) of the Act cannot be made. 09. The learned Departmental Representative vehemently supported the order of lower authorities and stated that there is a finding of the learned CIT(A) that advances are not for the purpose of business and are not driven out of business expediency and therefore, the addition has correctly been made under section 2(22)(e) of the Act. 0 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... visions of section 2(22)(e) of the Act. The case of the assessee is supported by the following decisions namely (i) Chandrashekhar Maruti vs. ACIT ITA No.5410/Mum/2012 47 CCH 0783, 183 TTJ 0459, (ii). Ackruti City Ltd. vs. DCIT [ITA No. 4869/Mum/2009(iii)CIT vs. Suraj Dev Dada [(2014) 46 taxmann.com 402 (Punjab Haryana)]. In the case of Chandrasekhar Maruti vs. ACIT (supra) the co- ordinate bench of the Tribunal has held that where there is a running account between the two sister concerns wherein there is a continuous exchange of transactions and the account was squared up during the year, no part of the said amounts could be treated as being attributed to the shareholders. We find that in the case of the assessee, the facts are exactly ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... meaning of section 2(22)(e) of the Act. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case in the light of various decisions as discussed above, we are of the considered view that the money advanced is used for the purpose of business of the former and therefore can not a loan/deposit to be treated as deemed dividend. Accordingly, we are not in agreement with the conclusion drawn by the Ld. CIT(A) on this issue. Thus we are inclined to set aside the order of Ld. CIT(A) and direct the AO to delete the addition. 011. Co-ordinate Bench has given categorical finding that all these loans and advances given to different companies by other companies are in the nature of loans and advances out of commercial consideration and business expedien ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
