9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 1705X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee had availed loans on various dates from the company in which he had substantial interest. 2. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has further erred in allowing benefit to the assessee by deleting the said addition of ₹ 18,00,000/-, without appreciating the fact that the provisions of section 2(22)(e) are deeming provisions as per which any loan /advance availed by a person having substantial interest in the company is to be treated as dividend because the case is not covered by any of the exceptions. Such a view is also supported by the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Tarulata Shyam others vs CIT(1977)108 ITR 345 (SC). 3. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e was not taking only temporary advances from the company but also giving temporary advances to the company. It was further submitted that the issue was covered in favour of the assessee by the order of Chandigarh Bench of the Tribunal in DCIT Vs Lakra Brothers 162 Taxman (Chd) 170. The Ld. CIT(A) agreed with the submissions and allowed the relief. 5. Before us, Ld. DR strongly supported the order of Assessing Officer. 6. On the other hand, Ld. Counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions made before the CIT(A). He also referred to page 24 of the paper book which is a copy of the account of the assessee in the books of H.S. Steel Pvt Ltd. He submitted that at no point of time the assessee had taken a loan of ₹ 18 lakhs. I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d by the Legislature. If that be so each and every entry of credit in the account of the company will be treated as profit. If repayment of the credit made will mean the return of income. This type of juggled income was never anticipated by the Legislature. There being no contract or agreement for raising of loan and advance the terms of its acceptance and repayment, the transaction can, at best be treated as a debt but not loan or advance . This ground is, therefore, allowed. We are of the opinion that Ld. CIT(A) has correctly adjudicated the issue. The copy of the account of the assessee in the books of the company is as under:- Period : 01-04-2006 to 31-03-2007 Asstt. Year 2007-2008 Date Nar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 07 BY CH. NO. 297507 3,50,000.00 0.00 24-01-2007 BY CH. NO. 297519 8,00,000.00 8,00,000.00 CR 25-01-2007 TO CH. NO. 278046 5,00,000.00 3,00,000.00 CR 27-01-2007 TO CH. NO. 278047 3,00,000.00 0.00 07-03-2007 TO CH. NO. 278323 2,00,000.00 2,00,000.00 DR ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he parties were heard. 10. After considering the rival submissions, we find that this issue has been decided by Ld. CIT(A) vide para 3.2 which is as under:- I have gone through the facts relating to the controversy. The financing entry of ₹ 4,00,000/- was supported by bank records and copy of account of the lending party in the books of account of the assessee. The confirmed copy could not be filed because the representative of the concern could not be contacted. The assessee has now filed the confirmed copy of account of the above concern. Since many other credits have been accepted by the Assessing Officer on the basis of evidence in the shape of confirmed copy of account the credit in the account of Shree Ganesh Ispat Co is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
