9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (3) TMI 1301X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the case of CIT Vs Mahavir Inductomelt Pvt Ltd [ 2017 (8) TMI 123 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT ] In a case in which an amount is received from a person other than the shareholder, as is the admitted position in this case, the provisions of Section 2(22)(e) cannot indeed be invoked. The CIT(A) was thus justified in granting the impugned relief in respect of the addition under section 2(22)(e). We, therefor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... loan of ₹ 42,00,000 from one company by the name of Leela News Network Pvt Ltd, in which Komalkant Sharma, who had 54.61% holding in the assessee company, had 97.67% holding therein. It was also noted that the said company had accumulated profits to the extent of ₹ 5,47,903. In this backdrop, the Assessing Officer treated amount of ₹ 5,47,903 as deemed dividend. Aggrieved, asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court's judgment in the case of CIT Vs Mahavir Inductomelt Pvt Ltd (TA No. 890 of 2011; judgment dated 13th January 2017) wherein Their Lordships have extensively reproduced from Hon'ble Delhi High Court's judgment in the case of Anitech Pvt Ltd (supra), and concurred with the same. Thus, in a case in which an amount is received from a person other than the shareholder ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
