9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 1471X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the CIT(A) u/s 251 of the Act. Such directions are uncalled for and deserve to be expunged from the findings of the CIT(A). Drawing support from the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO Vs. Murlidhar Bhagwan Das [1964 (1) TMI 5 - SUPREME COURT] we direct the AO to read the order of the first appellate authority without direction to take action u/s 147/148 of the Act. DR reliance upon the provisions of section 150(1) is misplaced in as much as section 150(1) of the Act contains the provisions for cases where assessment is in pursuance of an order of appeal etc. This section does not permit the first appellate authority to pass orders on issues which were never the subject matter of appeal before him. - Dec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... und that the share holders of M/s Kimo Clothing Design Concept Pvt Ltd. have more than 10% stake in the assessee company and the share holders of M/s Kimo Clothing Design Concept Pvt Ltd. are common shares through M/s Kimo Clothing Design Concept Pvt Ltd.. Applying the provisions of section 2(22)(e) of the Act, the AO treated the amount of ₹ 1,24,05,816/- as deemed dividend in the hands of the assessee company. 5. The assessee agitated the matter before the first appellate authority and after considering the facts and submissions, the CIT(A) has held as under: In view of the above, Mr. Rajeev Sharma and Ms. Ida Margaretha Verips are the actual beneficiaries and deemed dividend should be taxed in their hands in the ratio of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndings which read However, such addition of deemed dividend shall be made in the hands of the share holders Shri Rajeev Sharma and Smt. Ida Mangartha by the jurisdictional AO. 7. Before us, the ld. A.R. vehemently stated that after deleting the impugned addition from the hands of the assessee, the ld.CIT(A) grossly erred in giving such directions which are beyond his appellate powers. It is the say of the ld. AR that the first appellate authority should have restricted his findings to the subject matter of the appeal and by doing so, he has exceeded his powers. 8. Per contra, the ld. DR supported the findings of the ld. CIT(A) stating that no prejudice is caused to the assessee in as much as the additions from his hands have been de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of a person other than a shareholder . 10. A perusal of the aforesaid grievance before the CIT(A) shows that the assessee was aggrieved by the treatment of deemed dividend in the hands of the assessee company in respect of loan raised from Kimo Clothing Design Concepts. u/s 246A of the Act, an assessee can prefer an appeal before the CIT(A) if he is aggrieved by any order mentioned in clause (a), (aa), (ab), (b), (ba), (bb), (c), (d), (e), (f), (g), (h), (ha), (hb), (i), (j), (ja) (k), (l), (m), (n), (o), (p), (q), (r). The powers of the CIT(A) while disposing the appal are given in section 251 of the Act and the same read as under : In disposing of the appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) as the case may he, has following powers : ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... additions made u/s 2(22)(e) of the Act in the hands of the appellant. Once the CIT(A) was convinced that the additions made by the AO are not justified in the hands of the assessee and once he has deleted the additions from the hands of the assessee, the matter should have ended there. But, ironically, the CIT(A) proceeded further in directing the AO to make the additions in the hands of some other persons and such directions are beyond the powers vested upon the CIT(A) u/s 251 of the Act. Such directions are uncalled for and deserve to be expunged from the findings of the CIT(A). 14. Our view is fortified by the judgment of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO Vs. Murlidhar Bhagwan Das 52 ITR335 where the facts of the case were ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der under section 31, section 33A, section 33B, section 66 or section 66A must necessarily relate to the assessment of the year under appeal, revision or reference, as the case might be. (iv) That the second proviso to section 34(3) only lifted the ban of limitation and did not: enlarge the jurisdiction of the Tribunals under the relevant sections. (v) That the expressions finding ' and direction in the second proviso to section 34(3), meant respectively, a finding necessary for giving relief in respect of the assessment for the year in question, and a direction which the appellate or revisional authority, as the case may be, was empowered to give under the sections mentioned in that proviso. A finding therefore could on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
