9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2012 (3) TMI 265 - HC - Income TaxAddition made in assessee s hands relating to dividend income on bonus shares received by M/s. Raman Kant Brothers & Associates to whom the assessee had earlier gifted equity shares and that this said gift was held to be wholly void Tribunal deleted the addition Held that - Division Bench judgment of this Court in 2001 answered the question in favor of assessee in respect of the A.Y. 1989- 90 and since Revenue could not successfully point out any distinguishing feature between the decided case and the one in hand. Thus decided in favor of the assessee.
Issues:
1. Interpretation of law regarding deletion of addition of dividend income on bonus shares. Analysis: The judgment by the High Court pertains to a substantive question of law framed by the Revenue in ITA No. 40/98, concerning the deletion of an addition of Rs. 87,500 in the assessee's hands related to dividend income on bonus shares received by a specific entity. The Court was tasked with determining whether the Tribunal was correct in law in deleting this addition, considering the circumstances where the assessee had previously gifted equity shares to the same entity, which were later deemed void. The Court referred to a Division Bench judgment in a similar case, where the question was answered in favor of the assessee for the assessment year 1989-90. The counsel for the assessee relied on this precedent, emphasizing the similarity between the decided case and the current one. The Court noted that the Revenue failed to establish any distinguishing feature between the two cases. Consequently, the Court concluded that the question must be resolved in favor of the assessee and against the Revenue. As a result, the reference was disposed of with the question being answered in favor of the assessee. In summary, the judgment underscores the importance of precedent and consistency in legal interpretations, highlighting the significance of prior decisions in shaping current outcomes. The Court's analysis focused on the similarity between the present case and a previous judgment, ultimately leading to a ruling in favor of the assessee based on established legal principles and interpretations.
|
