Income Tax

Deemed dividend can’t be taxed in the hands of Partnership firm not having shares in company

Deemed dividend to be taxed in the hands of individual shareholder and not in the hands of Partnership Firm in which he is partner

ABCAUS Case Law Citation
ABCAUS 3638 (2023) (01) HC

In the instant case, the assessee had challenged the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT/Tribunal) confirming taxation of deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act 1961 (the Act) in the hands of Partnership firm and not the individual shareholder.

The question of law framed was as to whether the deemed dividend paid should be taxed in the hands of the Individual Director shareholder or in the hands of the appellant firm of which he was a partner?

The appellant assessee was a Partnership Firm. The said Firm had four partners one of whom had contributed 20% of the shares of the Firm. The said partner was also a director and substantial shareholder of a Limited company.

The said company gave a unsecured loan to the Partnership Firm. The Assessing Officer (AO) treated the unsecured loan as  a deemed dividend in the hands of the Firm and added it to the income of the Firm invoking Section 2(22)(e) of the Act.

The CIT(A) allowed the assessee’s appeal and held that in terms of Section 2(22)(e) of the Act, the amount could be treated as deemed dividend only in the hands of shareholder since he is the beneficial owner of the shares in the said company.

On Revenue’s appeal, the ITAT by the impugned order remanded the matter to the CIT(A) on the ground that it was  not clear whether deemed dividend should be taxed in the hands of the assessee or in the hands of the firm.

However, the Hon’ble High Court opined that a plain reading of the section 2(22)(e) indicates that the taxing of the deemed dividend has to be in the hands of the shareholder. 

The Hon’ble High Court observed that in the present case,  admittedly the partner of the firm held the shares in his individual capacity. On the other hand the Firm, did not hold any shares in the company.

The Hon’ble High Court opined that the CIT(A) was right in his conclusion.

The Hon’ble High Court stated that since the plain reading of  Section 2(22)(e) of the Act makes it clear that the deemed dividend is to be taxed in the hands of  individual  shareholder  and not an entity which does not hold shares, the question of remanding the matter to the CIT(A) did not arise.

Accordingly, the question framed was answered in favour of the Assessee and against the Department by holding that the deemed dividend should be taxed in the hands of individual Director of the company and not in the hands of the Appellant Partnership Firm.

Download Full Judgment Click Here >>

Share

Recent Posts

  • Income Tax

AO took a reasonable stand that 25 kg written in WhatsApp chat was 25 lakh – ITAT

Assessing Officer had taken a reasonable stand that 25 kg written in WhatsApp chat/text message was 25 lakh - ITAT…

5 hours ago
  • Income Tax

Shareholders can’t be taxed for income from properties owned by the company – HC

Shareholders are only owners of the shares of the company therefore, income from properties earned by the company cannot be…

7 hours ago
  • Income Tax

Jurisdictional error in reassessment approval can’t be shielded by the law of limitation

When approval for reassessment was granted by unauthorised authority, such jurisdictional error cannot be shielded by the law of limitation…

10 hours ago
  • Income Tax

ITAT ought to remanded whole matter of bogus purchases instead of profit determination

ITAT on presumption of bogus purchases ought to have remanded case to AO to reconsider the whole matter instead of…

11 hours ago
  • Income Tax

Where proceedings u/s 153C barred by limitation, AO can’t invoke section 148 & 148A

Where proceedings u/s 153C are barred by limitation, AO can not reopen the case invoking section 148 and 148A of…

1 day ago
  • bankruptcy

Corporate guarantees executed by corporate debtor constitute “financial debt” under IBC

Corporate guarantees executed by the corporate debtor constitute “financial debt” under IBC and banks to be recognized as financial creditors…

1 day ago