9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (8) TMI 388X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not a shareholder - it is only the person whose name is entered in the Register of the shareholders of the Company as the holder of the shares who can be said to be a shareholder qua Company and not the person beneficially entitled to the shares - it is only where a loan is advanced by the Company to the registered shareholder and the other conditions set out in Section 2(22)(e) of the Act are satisfied, that amount of loan would be liable to be regarded as deemed dividend – Decided against Revenue. Amendment to section 80IB prospective in nature – Form No. 10CCB not filed – Held that:- The provision came on the statute book by Finance Act 2004, with effect from 1/4/2005 - The plan which is sanctioned is of 16/3/2004 ie., prior to the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch was introduced to forestall the manipulation of likelihood of closely held companies and distributing their profits not by way of dividends but by way of loans and advances to escape tax? (3) In view of the ground No.2 above, whether the CIT(A) is correct in holding that deemed dividend that arose under Section 2(22)(e) of the IT Act should be taxed in the hands of the shareholder only and not in the hands of the concern as per Board s Circular No. 495 dated 22/08/87? (4) Whether CIT(A) was right in deleting the addition made u/s 80IB even though the assessee has not filed the prescribed Form No. 10CCB along with the return of income as stipulated under the Act? 3. Insofar as question Nos. 1 and 2 are concerned, this court in th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llate Authority and the Tribunal. In the circumstances, we answer the question as formulated by us in favour of the respondent-assessee and against the revenue. In that view of the matter, the said substantial questions of law are answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. 4. Insofar as question Nos. 3 and 4 are concerned, it relates to the assessee complying with the requirements provided under Sub-sec.(1) of Sec.80 IB before it could claim the benefit provided under Sec. 80 IB. The said provision came on the statute book by Finance Act 2004, with effect from 1/4/2005. The plan which is sanctioned in this case is of 16/3/2004 ie., prior to the said provision coming into force. This court in more than one case has held ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Corporation Act is for issuance of occupancy certificate. When the statute does not provide for issue of a completion certificate, if the authorities were insisting on such certificate, the assessee has gone to the Village Panchayat within whose limits the property is situated and has obtained the completion certificate and has produced the same for availing the benefit. Whether that certificate would satisfy the requirement of law need not be gone into in these proceedings because, when the statute does not provide for issue of such a certificate, if the Revenue insists on such certificate, the assessee would be left with no option except to get such certificate with some authority which would be called as a local authority. In the facts o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
