TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 1869X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rajkot Nagrik Sahkari Bank claimed as exempt income but the assessee has not provided information about the nature of the impugned dividend income. The assessing officer observed that exemption u/s 10(34) of the act on dividend income received from the AOP which is not subject to payment of dividend distribution tax according to provision of section 115-O are not available. The assessee has not provided sufficient details which could have demonstrated the actual nature of the dividend income received by the assessee. Therefore, to examine the issue of availability of exemption on dividend income the case of the assessee was reopened u/s 147 of the act. Consequently during the reassessment proceedings the claim of the assessee that dividend income was exempt as per section 10(34) of the act was found to be invalid. Therefore, after considering the above facts and material on record, we are inclined with the decision of the Ld. CIT(A). Therefore, this ground of appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Disallowance u/s. 40A(2)(b) - Assessee failed to substantiate the payment of interest at an exorbitant rate to related parties as against prevailing market rate of interest of 12% ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2010-11, assessee has challenged reopening of the assessment and the grounds taken by the assessee in all these three years qua this issue is verbatim same. First, we take the issue regarding reopening of assessment in these assessment years. 4. In this case, original return of income was filed by the assessee declaring total income of Rs. 84,49,900/-. Subsequently, the case was reopened for assessment u/s. 147 of the act by issuing of notice u/s. 148 of the act on 31st March, 2014. The assessee has shown dividend income of Rs. 10,8,744/- from Rajkot Nagrik Sahkari Bank as exempt income. The assessing officer observed that the assessee was not eligible for exemption of aforesaid dividend income as per the provision of section 10(34) r.w.s. 115(O) of the act. He further observed that aforesaid bank was not a company and had not paid any dividend distribution tax as per section 115-0 of the act. Therefore, the assessing officer concluded that exemption u/s 10(34) of the act on dividend income received from the aforesaid bank was not available. 5. Aggrieved assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) has sustained the addition made by the assessing officer by obs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of section 10(34) of the act the income received by way of dividend is exempted if dividend distribution tax has been paid as per the provision of section 115-0 of the acts. We have further observed that Rajkot Nagrik Sahkari Bank being not a company is not subject to payment of dividend distribution tax . The dividend income is exempt as per provision of section 10(34) of the act as referred u/s. 115-O of the IT. Act. The provisions of section 10(34) are reproduced as under :- 10(34) any income by way of dividends referred to in section 115-O : [Provided that nothing in this clause shall apply to any income by way of dividend chargeable to tax in accordance with the provisions of section 115BBDA;] We observed that it is an undisputed fact the dividend received from Rajkot Nagrik Sahkari Bank was not subject to dividend distribution tax. After taking into consideration the above facts and findings of the Ld. CIT(A) we do not find any reason to interfere in the decision of the Ld. CIT(A). Therefore, the ground of appeal of the assessee is dismissed on this issue. Similarly the identical issues in appeal of other assessment years are also dismissed. 7. Regarding ground ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ening of the assessment u/s. 147 of the Act. After considering the entire facts of the case, I am of the considered opinion that reopening of assessment is valid and justified as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The action of the A.O. is upheld. This ground of appeal is dismissed. We noticed that the assessee has shown dividend income of Rs. 10,8,744/- from Rajkot Nagrik Sahkari Bank claimed as exempt income but the assessee has not provided information about the nature of the impugned dividend income. The assessing officer observed that exemption u/s 10(34) of the act on dividend income received from the AOP which is not subject to payment of dividend distribution tax according to provision of section 115-O are not available. The assessee has not provided sufficient details which could have demonstrated the actual nature of the dividend income received by the assessee. Therefore, to examine the issue of availability of exemption on dividend income the case of the assessee was reopened u/s 147 of the act. Consequently during the reassessment proceedings the claim of the assessee that dividend income was exempt as per section 10(34) of the act was found to be inval ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
