9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (1) TMI 1165X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... BOMBAY HIGH COURT). This view has been further reiterated by another Division Bench of this Court in Impact Containers (2014 (9) TMI 88 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT) rendered on 4th July, 2014. - Decided against revenue. - INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 197 OF 2013 - - - Dated:- 20-1-2015 - M.S.SANKLECHA, G.S.KULKARNI, JJ. Mr. Arvind Pinto, for the Appellant Mr. Mihir Naniwadekar, for the Respondent JUDGEMENT This Appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act), challenges the order dated 8th May, 2012 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (the Tribunal) for the Assessment Year 200708. 2. The Revenue has formulated the following reframed question of law for our consideration: Whether the facts and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ited 324 ITR 263 (Bom.), ld. D. R. submitted that she dutifully relies on the decision of Assessing Officer. 4. In view of the above, we indicated to Mr. Pinto, learned Counsel appearing for the Revenue that it appears that the Revenue had conceded before the Tribunal that the issue involved in the Appeal before it is covered by the Special Bench of the Tribunal. However, Mr. Pinto submitted that if paragraph 6 is read in its entirety it would be evident that Departmental Representative appearing for the Revenue had relied upon the decision of the Assessing Officer and not upon the decision referred to earlier. Although we do not agree with the above submission as our reading of the above paragraph is that Departmental Representative pl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7. On Appeal, the CIT(A) held that the loan given by M/s. NS Fincon Pvt. Ltd to the RespondentAssessee is not the payment made by it to its share holder. Thus, Section 2 (22)(e) of the Act could have no application. The CIT(A) further held that Section 2 (22)(e) of the Act creates a fiction by bringing to tax an amount as dividend when the amount so received is otherwise then dividend. Therefore, Section 2(22) (e) of the Act has to be strictly read. 8. On further appeal to the Tribunal by the Revenue, the impugned order placed reliance upon the decisions of this Court in Universal Medicare (P) Ltd. (supra) read with its decision in Bhaumik Colours (P) Ltd. (supra) and the decision of Rajasthan High Court in CIT v/s. Hotel Hilltop 313 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... them the loan/ advances, as tax would be payable if the same were distributed as dividend. 11. The submission on behalf of the Revenue made before us is that one has to look at the substance of the transaction and that if one looks at the substance, then the RespondentAssessee would be chargeable to tax. This is not acceptable as fiscal status have to be interpreted strictly. We can do no better then meet the submission of the Revenue by inviting attention to the decision of the Supreme Court in CIT v/s. Vatika Township 2015 (1) SCC 1 wherein it has been observed as under: 41.2:- At the same time, it is also mandated that there cannot be imposition of any tax without the authority of law. Such a law has to be unambiguous and sho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncerns itself with the substance of the thing upon which the tax is imposed, rather than with legal forms or expressions. But in statutes levying taxes the literal meaning of the words employed is most important, for such statutes are not to be extended by implication beyond the clear impost of the language used. If the words are doubtful, the doubt must be resolved against the Government and in favour of the taxpayer. Gould v. Gould L Ed p. 213: Usp 153. 41.5 As Lord Carins said many years ago in Partington v. Attorne General (LR p. 122) .... as I understand the principle of all fiscal legislation it is this: if the person sought to be taxed comes within the letter of the law he must be taxed, however great the hardship ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
