2012 (10) TMI 469 - AT - Income Tax

Taxability of Deemed Dividend - Shri K.Pratap is a shareholder the companies in his individual capacity, and the assessee company itself is not the shareholders - Held that - the appellant company is not a shareholder in M/s. Golden Gate Properties Ltd. and therefore the provisions of section 2(22)(e) are not applicable. Advance of Rs.1,23,50,000 received by the assessee company cannot be treated as deemed dividend. In this view of the matter, we find no infirmity in the impugned order of the CIT(A), which is accordingly confirmed, and the grounds of the Revenue in its appeal are dismissed - in favour of assessee. Addition made in Income by Assessing Officer - Appeal by Assessee - Assessee contended that in Survey which take place in premises of assessee director of the assessee company, Shri K.Pratap, admitted an additional income tax of Rs.5,00,000 for the financial year 2006-07 relevant to the assessment year 2007-08, but did not offer the corresponding income for the assessment year 2007-08. Not convinced with the explanation of the assessee in this behalf, the assessing officer made an addition of Rs.15,00,000/- to the income returned by the assessee, to cover the income relatable to the additional income tax admitted at the time of survey, to be paid for the year under appeal. Held that - Impugned addition made by assessing office is merely based on the above statement and without pointing out any deficiencies in the books of account or bringing on record any material to substantiate the addition of Rs.15,00,000 is not justified and has to be disallowed - in favour of assessee.

Issues Involved:
1. Interpretation of provisions of section 2(22)(e) of the Act regarding deemed dividend.
2. Addition of Rs.1,23,50,000 as deemed dividend in assessment year 2007-08.
3. Confirmation of addition of Rs.15 lakhs by the Assessing officer.
4. Whether the statement made at the time of survey justified the addition.

Interpretation of Provisions of Section 2(22)(e) - Deemed Dividend:
The primary issue revolved around the interpretation of provisions of section 2(22)(e) of the Act concerning deemed dividend. The Revenue contended that the CIT(A) erred in not taxing the deemed dividend received by the assessee from M/s. Golden Gate Properties Ltd. The assessing officer had added Rs.1,23,50,000 as deemed dividend, which was later deleted by the CIT(A). The CIT(A) based the deletion on decisions by the Allahabad High Court and the Special Bench of the Tribunal, stating that the provisions of section 2(22)(e) do not apply if the recipient company is not a shareholder in the paying company. As the appellant company was not a shareholder in M/s. Golden Gate Properties Ltd., the addition was deemed unsustainable under the law. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, citing relevant judicial pronouncements, and dismissed the Revenue's appeal.

Addition of Deemed Dividend - Assessment Year 2007-08:
The factual background involved the assessee receiving money from M/s. Golden Gate Properties Ltd., leading to a dispute on whether it constituted deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e) of the Act. The assessing officer added Rs.1,23,50,000 as deemed dividend, which was later deleted by the CIT(A) and further upheld by the Tribunal. The decision was based on the fact that the appellant company was not a shareholder in M/s. Golden Gate Properties Ltd., and thus, the provisions of section 2(22)(e) did not apply. The Tribunal confirmed the CIT(A)'s order, dismissing the Revenue's appeal.

Confirmation of Addition of Rs.15 Lakhs:
The issue involved the confirmation of an addition of Rs.15 lakhs made by the Assessing officer based on a statement made by the Director of the assessee company during a survey. The Director had offered to pay a tax of Rs.5,00,000 for the assessment year 2007-08, but the assessing officer added Rs.15,00,000 to cover the income related to the additional tax admitted during the survey. The CIT(A) confirmed this addition, leading to the assessee's appeal. The Tribunal, after examining the statement made by the Director, concluded that the addition was not justified as the Director's offer was specific to paying a tax of Rs.5,00,000 and not additional income tax. The Tribunal found the addition baseless and lacking substantiating material, hence deleting it and allowing the assessee's appeal.

Statement Made at the Time of Survey Justification:
The statement made by the Director at the time of survey played a crucial role in justifying the addition of Rs.15 lakhs by the Assessing officer. However, the Tribunal found that the statement only referred to the payment of a tax of Rs.5,00,000 for the assessment year 2007-08, without indicating additional income tax. The Tribunal also noted the absence of any incriminating material or deficiencies in the books of account to support the addition. Consequently, the Tribunal deemed the addition unjustified and lacking legal merit, leading to its deletion and allowing the assessee's appeal.

In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal regarding the deemed dividend addition and allowed the assessee's appeal concerning the addition of Rs.15 lakhs, based on the specific circumstances and legal interpretations outlined in the judgment.

← Previous Next →