9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 1243X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment thereafter made by the Assessee to DIPL should be taken to be in the nature of repayment of the loan. The stand of the Assessee that the opening debit balance cannot be treated as a starting point for considering the nature of the payments made during the year finds support in the decision of the High Court of Madras in Sunil Kapoor v. Commissioner of Income Tax [2015 (3) TMI 812 - MADRAS HIG ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ibhu Bakhru, JJ. For the Petitioner : Ms. Suruchi Aggarwal, Senior Standing counsel with Ms. Radhika Gupta and Mr. Abhishek Sharma, Advs For the Respondent : Mr. Gagan Kumar with Ms. Niyati Chanana, Advs ORDER 1. This appeal by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act') is directed against the order dated 21st October 2014 passed by the Income Tax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nce. The ITAT examined the account of the Assessee titled as 'Harsh Dhir Loan Ledger Account' in the books of DIPL. It was pointed out before the ITAT that all transactions noted in the account were in respect of cheque discounting by the Assessee through DIPL. It was explained that DIPL had a facility of discounting the cheque with the bank and, therefore, the Assessee issued cheque in th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ,76,85,098 as on 1st April 2008. According to her, it was the case of the AO that the repayments made by the Assessee on 18th November 2008 and 4th March 2009 to DIPL should be taken to be a repayment of loan represented by the aforementioned outstanding debit balance. 6. The Court is unable to accept the above submission. The AO has simply proceeded on the assumption that since there is an ope ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the question in the affirmative holding that it is only the relevant entries during the year in question that had to be looked into and that only those amounts paid to the Assessee by the company during the relevant year, less the amount repaid by the Assessee in the same year, should be deemed to be dividend. 7. Consequently, the Court finds no legal infirmity in the order of the ITAT. No subs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
