9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (4) TMI 1227X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Limited, were not the companies in which public was substantially interested - the assessee, being shareholder, was holding shares more than 10% (i.e. 95% in M/s Rustagi Projects and 50% in M/s Yen Pulses Private Limited) in both the companies. Both the companies have credited loan to the assessee. Thus, the basic conditions of section 2(22)(e) are satisfied in the present case. Further, such a payment for the purpose of section 2(22)(e) of the Act should be to the extent to which the company possesses accumulated profits. As per the provision of Explanation 2, all the profits of the company up to the date of distribution or payment under section 2(22)(e) of the Act shall be considered as accumulated profits. Thus, the provision of Expla ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2. In this appeal, the assessee has raised the following grounds: 1. Because, the learned Assessing Officer erred in making ad hoc disallowances of ₹ 3,62,366, on account of deemed dividend without considering the business exigency and other fact of the case. 2. Because, the learned Assessing Officer erred in making ad hoc disallowances of ₹ 27,615, on account of depreciation with unjustified reasons. 3. When the appeal was called for hearing, no one was present on behalf of the assessee to present the case. There is no application seeking adjournment either. On perusal of the record, it is observed that on immediate four previous occasions also no one appeared on behalf of the assessee, however, prior to that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tal loan of ₹ 1,95,49,600 from both the companies during the relevant financial year. In order to further verify applicability of section 2(22)(e) of the Act, the assessee was asked to furnish copy of share capital account in the books of aforesaid 2 companies. On perusal of Ledger, the Assessing Officer found that percentage of the shareholding of the assessee in M/s Rustagi Projects and M/s Yen Pulses Private Limited was 95% and 50% respectively. The Assessing Officer also found from the balance sheet of M/s Rustagi Projects that the accumulated profit as on 31.03.2011 was Rs. Nil and as on 31.03.2012 was ₹ 3,39,021. Further the accumulated profit in M/s Yen Pulses Private Limitedas on 31.03.2012 was ₹ 79,000. As, both t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... payment by a company, not being a company in which the public are substantially interested, of any sum (whether as representing a part of the assets of the company or otherwise) made after the 31st day of May, 1987, by way of advance or loan to a shareholder, being a person who is the beneficial owner of shares (not being shares entitled to a fixed rate of dividend whether with or without a right to participate in profits) holding not less than ten per cent of the voting power, or to any concern in which such shareholder is a member or a partner and in which he has a substantial interest (hereafter in this clause referred to as the said concern) or any payment by any such company on behalf, or for the individual benefit, of any such shareho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and in sub-clause (c) shall include all profits of the company up to the date of liquidation, but shall not, where the liquidation is consequent on the compulsory acquisition of its undertaking by the Government or a corporation owned or controlled by the Government under any law for the time being in force, include any profits of the company prior to three successive previous years immediately preceding the previous year in which such acquisition took place. As per the provision of Explanation 2, all the profits of the company up to the date of distribution or payment under section 2(22)(e) of the Act shall be considered as accumulated profits. Thus, the provision of Explanation 2 to section 2(22) of the Act does not distinguish betwe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vehicle. In absence of any log book being maintained for the usage of vehicle by the proprietor and their family, the Assessing Officer vide order dated 25.03.2015 disallowed 20% of depreciation on motor car as being attributable to personal usage of the asset in terms of provisions of section 38(2) of the Act. Accordingly, an amount of ₹ 27,615 being 20% was added back to the assessee s total income. The learned CIT(A) vide impugned order dated 25.05.2018 dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee on this issue. 14. Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us. During the course of hearing, the learned D.R. vehemently relied upon the orders passed by the lower authorities. 15. In view of the material available on recor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
