2016 (2) TMI 793 - AT - Income Tax

Reopening of assessment - Addition u/s 2(22)(e) - Held that - First is validity of initiation of re-assessment proceedings and the second, taxability on a sum of ₹ 6,79,956/- representing to 50% of the sum of ₹ 13,59,911/- in the hands of appellant. As to the validity of re assessment proceedings, we do not find any justification to disturb the conclusion arrived at by the ld. CIT(A) who has rightly held the action as valid laying his hands on the decision of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Phool Chand Bajrang Lal Vs. ITO, 1993 (7) TMI 1 - SUPREME Court . In the present case, the Assessing Officer received information after appellate order in the case of PAN Portfolio (P) Ltd. wherein the CIT(A) has given the direction to take action in the case of the assessee. Therefore, initiation of proceedings u/s. 147 on this count cannot be said to be invalid. Besides, after receipt of reasons recorded, no such grievance/objection on initiation of proceedings u/s. 147 appears to have been raised at the initial stage before the Assessing Officer. Therefore, finding on validity of re-assessment proceedings stands confirmed. Once, the taxability of the impugned sum as deemed dividend in the hands of the common directors of the lender company, stood decided by the Tribunal and attained finality, we have no option except to respectfully follow the decision of co-ordinate bench of Tribunal in order to maintain the balance of justice. No such evidence is available on record that the order of the Tribunal has either been challenged or reversed by the higher courts. Furthermore, a perusal of the assessment order reveals, the assessee in reply dated 05.09.2013 filed before the AO submitted that the assessee did not derive any benefit from the loans obtained from M/s. PAN Portfolio Pvt. Ltd. and no such plea appears to have been made before the AO that the transaction between the two companies was not in the nature of loan but an inter corporate deposit, not attracting the provisions of section 2(22)(e) of the Act. In view of this discussion, we do not find any good ground to interfere with the impugned order on this count too. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is liable to be dismissed. - Decided against assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Validity of initiating re-assessment proceedings under section 147 of the Act without a valid reason.
2. Taxability of a sum of Rs. 6,79,956/- as deemed dividend in the hands of the appellant.

Issue 1: The validity of initiating re-assessment proceedings was challenged by the appellant, arguing that the proceedings lacked a valid reason for escapement of income. The appellant relied on a decision of ITAT Kolkata and contended that the transaction between the two companies was in the nature of an inter-corporate deposit, not covered under section 2(22)(e) of the Act. However, the Tribunal upheld the initiation of proceedings under section 147, citing the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a relevant case. The Tribunal found that the Assessing Officer received information post an appellate order in another case, justifying the initiation of proceedings. No objections were raised initially, confirming the validity of the re-assessment proceedings.

Issue 2: The second issue pertained to the taxability of a sum of Rs. 6,79,956/- as deemed dividend in the hands of the appellant, who held a 50% share in the lender company. The CIT(A) had previously decided on the taxability of this amount, which was affirmed by the Tribunal. The Tribunal noted that the decision had not been challenged or reversed by higher courts. The appellant failed to provide evidence that the transaction was not a loan but an inter-corporate deposit, exempt from section 2(22)(e) of the Act. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the taxability of the sum as deemed dividend, following the earlier decision and maintaining the balance of justice. The appeal of the assessee was dismissed, and the charging of interest under section 234B of the Act was deemed consequential and upheld.