Tag: deemed dividend 2(22)(e)
Advance received by Managing Director / shareholder held deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) though repaid within two months. In a recent judgment Hon’ble Bombay High Court has upheld that business advance received by the Managing Director/shareholder of the company though repaid within two months constituted “deemed dividend” within the …
For arriving at accumulated profits for deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e), depreciation under Income-tax Act is to be deducted – ITAT In a recent judgment, ITAT Chandigarh has held that for arriving at accumulated profits for deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e), depreciation under Income-tax Act is to be deducted. Also, …
No deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) if funds not utilized for the benefit of the substantial shareholder – ITAT In a recent judgment, ITAT Hyderabad has deleted the addition as deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) holding that the payments made by the company had been used for the business purposes …
No deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) when loan was received for commercial transaction and interest was paid on it In a recent judgment ITAT has held that there is no deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) when loan was received for commercial transaction and interest was paid on it ABCAUS Case …
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 CitationABCAUS 3638 (2023) (01) HC In the instant case, the assessee had challenged the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate …
Deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) applies only to net debit balance of advances in all accounts where assessee is maintaining multiple accounts with the same company ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 3065 (2019) (07) ITAT In the instant appeal had been filed by the assessee against the order of the …
Revision u/s 263 quashed as AO in view the legal position made a conscious decision holding that section 2(22)(e) was not applicable to the case. ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 2987 (2019) (06) ITAT Important Case Laws Cited/relied upon by the parties: Pradip Kumar Malhotra v CIT (2011) …
Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) on account of deemed dividend addition u/s 2(22)(e) deleted. Penalty cannot be imposed in a debatable issue where assessee had furnished complete details of the transaction. ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 2960 (2019) (05) ITAT Important Case Laws Cited/relied upon by the parties: James vs. …
Unaccounted tax liabilities to be deducted from reserves for levy of deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e). AO should consider the liability while considering the status of the accumulated profit of the assessee ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 2911 (2019) (05) ITAT Important Case Laws Cited/relied upon by the parties …
No deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) when assessee not the beneficial owner of shares. Issue pending before larger bench of Supreme Court was not relevant – High Court ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 2835 (2019) (03) HC Important Case Laws Cited/relied upon by the parties Universal Medicare National Travel …
