9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (8) TMI 798X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted by the Revenue at any point of time. AO observed in the Assessment Order that the assessee is having substantial interest in the above payer company as well as in recipient company. But the same was not elaborated or discussed by the AO in the Assessment Order. Nothing has been established against the assessee for application of Section 2(22)(e) on the ground that the amount advance is for purchase of suitable land and the said amount is shown in its Balance Sheet as current liability. Assessee has given all the details but the same was not at all taken into account in the context of applicability of Section 2(22)(e). Section 2(22)(e) will not be applicable in assessee s case as where loans and advaces are given in normal course o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , XXXIII, New Delhi erred in confirming the addition of ₹ 7,00,000/- on account of deemed dividend income u/s 2(22)(e) of Income Tax Act, 1961, despite the fact that appellant was not a party to the transactions entered into between two companies. 2.2 That the CIT(Appeal), XXXIII, New Delhi erred in confirming the addition of ₹ 7,00,000/- by way of deemed dividend income u/s 2(22)(e) of Income fax Act, 1961 in the hands of the appellant as taxing the said amount in the hands of appellant arising from the transactions between the two concerned companies inter se amounts to creating another deeming fiction, which is neither envisaged nor permissible in law. 3. The appellant craves permission to add, amend, alter or vary ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... added as deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 7,00,000 The Assessing Officer observed that the assessee is having substantial interest in the above payer company as well as in recipient company. During the assessment proceedings, the assessee company mainly objected to the application of Section 2(22)(e) on the ground that the amount advance is for purchase of suitable land and the said amount is shown in its Balance Sheet as current liability. After considering the reply, the Assessing Officer made addition of ₹ 7,00,000/- as deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 5. Being aggrieved by the order, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) dism ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ubmitted that these facts and documents clearly shows that amount was received by Visual Builders Pvt. Ltd. from BPTP Ltd. in ordinary course of business for purchase of land and against assignment of development rights in land and does not fall within purview of provision of Section 2(22)(e) of IT Act, 1961. The Ld. AR relied upon the decision of Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court of Delhi in following decisions:- i) CIT Vs Ambassador Travels Pvt. Ltd 173 Taxmann 407 (2008) (Del.) ii) CIT Vs Creative Dying and Painting Pvt. Ltd. in 184 Taxman 483(Delhi) iii) CIT vs. Ankitech Pvt. Ltd. [2011] 11 taxmann.com 100 (Delhi) 7. The Learned DR relied upon the assessment order and the order of the CIT(A). 8. We have heard both the par ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
