9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (4) TMI 162X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ned Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 27,62,982 made under the provisions of deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e). 3. Before us, the learned Departmental Representative submitted that while giving the findings, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has not properly appreciated the facts of the case which is evident from the findings given in Para-5.5 of the impugned order. He submitted that in the present case, the notice under section 148 was issued to re-open the case on the "reason" that during the relevant financial year, the assessee company has received loan amounting to Rs. 1,66,86,661 from Hegde Hotels India Pvt. Ltd., wherein one Mr. Sudhakar Hegde holds 36.31% shares in Hegde Hotels India Pvt. Ltd. a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iven before the learned Commissioner (Appeals) which has been incorporated at Page-5 of the appellate order and it was submitted that the amount of Rs. 27,62,982 was fully reconciled and that it was not in the nature of loan. As regards the contention of the learned Departmental Representative that the ultimate findings recorded by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) in his concluding paragraph no.5.5, he admitted that some factual error has crept in. 5. After carefully considering the rival submissions and also on a perusal of the relevant findings of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) and the A.O Officer, we find that the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has drawn his conclusion on some erroneous assumption of facts, the relevant paragraph ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the Assessing Officer has considered that the assessee has made investment in Hegde Hotels India Pvt. Ltd., which is not correct. Secondly, he has gone by the presumption that the Assessing Officer has based his calculation on the fact that Hegde Hotels India Pvt. Ltd. had given loan to Mr. Sudhakar Hegde, which in turn, has advanced to the assessee, which fact is also not correct. Further, he has not analysed as to what is the amount invested by Hegde Hotels India Pvt. Ltd. for the share application money in the assessee company and how much was the unsecured loan received by the assessee from the Hegde Hotels India Pvt. Ltd., and whether it was loan or not, or if loan, then what was the nature of the loan. He has also not analysed, w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
