Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


ACIT v. Gurdeep Singh ( 2020) 183 ITD 317 / 117 taxmann.com 451 / 206 TTJ 872 / 80 ITR 14 (SN) ( Chd) (Trib)

S. 2(22)(e):Deemed dividend – Share holder – Transferred share holding on borrower company to lender company before advance of loan – Addition cannot be made as deemed dividend .

Dy .CIT v .Veena Goyal ( Smt.) (2020) 119 taxmann.com 362 / 186 ITD 298( Jaipur ) (Trib)

S. 2(22)(e):Deemed dividend – Allotment of shares- Debited value of shares in the ledger account – Addition of debit balance as deemed dividend is held to be not be not justified .

Aspinwall and Co Ltd v. ACIT (2020) 183 ITD 621 / 116 taxmann.com 851 ( Cochin) (Trib)

S. 2(1A) : Agricultural income – Rubber manufacturer – Sale of rubber trees and timber cannot be brought to tax under rule 7A [ R.7A ]

Suvendra Kumar Pand v .ITO ( 2020) 121 taxmann.com 27 / 276 Taxman 171 ( Mag) (Mad) (HC)

S.148: Reassessment — Notice -Principal Officer- Notice issued in the name of Principal officer was quashed [ S.2(35(b) , 147 , Art . 226 ]

CIT v. Accel Ltd ( 2020) 429 ITR 36/ 273 Taxman 424/ 118 taxmann.com 103 ( Mad) (HC)

S. 2(22)(e):Deemed dividend – Amount received from subsidiary company as advance for providing corporate guarantee- Addition cannot be made as deemed dividend .

Vikram Krishna v. PCIT (2020) 114 taxmann.com 196 ( Delhi) (HC) Editorial: SLP of assessee is dismissed , Vikram Krishna v. PCIT (2020)269 Taxman 477/ 114 taxmann.com 197 (SC)

S. 2(22)(e):Deemed dividend – Director – No evidence to prove that the advance was in respect of sale of land – Addition as deemed dividend is held to be justified .

CIT v. Checkpoint Apparel Labelling Solutions ( India ) Ltd ( 2020) 120 taxmann.com 125 ( Mad) (HC)

S. 2(22)(e):Deemed dividend – Share holder – Not a shareholder in a company from which loan was received – Loan amount cannot be assessed as deemed dividend

PCIT v. Dina S. Shah ( Smt) ( 2020) 117 taxmann.com 100 ( Bom) (HC)

S. 2(22)(e):Deemed dividend – Deposit for purchase of premises – Addition cannot be made as deemed dividend – No question of law .[ S.260A]

CIT v. Vikas Oberoi (2017) 396 ITR 215 / ( 2020) 115 taxmann.com 260 (Bom.) (HC) Editorial : SLP is dismissed due to low tax effect ,CIT v. Vikas Oberoi (2017) 393 ITR 74 (St.)/ (2020) 115 taxmann.com 261 /272 Taxmann.188 (SC)

S. 2(22)(e) : Deemed dividend—Share application money received by companies from other companies—Additions cannot be made as deemed dividend.

Bhimaas Engineering and Projects Pvt Ltd v. Dy CIT ( 2021) 430 ITR 519 ( Mad) (HC) Ind Mark Properties P .Ltd v. ACIT ( 2021) 430 ITR 500 ( Mad) (HC)

Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act , 2020

S. 4: Filing of declaration and particulars to be furnished – Disputed tax – Pendency of Appeal before High Court – Permission to withdraw the appeal was granted –Given liberty to restore the appeal in the event the ultimate decision is taken on the declaration is against the assessee. [ S.260A ]