TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Supreme Court Affirms Interpretation of Income Tax Act's Section 2(22)(e), Ensures Uniform Legal Application.</h1> <h3>C.I.T., Delhi-II Versus Madhur Housing And Development Company & The State of Andhra Pradesh Versus M/s. Sideswari Power Generation Private Ltd.</h3> The SC, comprising Justices Nariman and Kaul, upheld the interpretation of Section 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act, aligning with the Delhi HC's Division ... Deemed dividend - decision in the case of COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Versus ANKITECH PVT LTD. & OTHERS [2011 (5) TMI 325 - DELHI HIGH COURT] referred - Held that: - the judgment is a detailed judgment going into Section 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act which arises at the correct construction of the said Section. We do not wish to add anything to the judgment except to say that we agree therewith. Issues:1. Interpretation of Section 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act.Analysis:The Supreme Court, comprising Mr. Rohinton Fali Nariman and Mr. Sanjay Kishan Kaul JJ., reviewed multiple civil appeals involving the interpretation of Section 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act. The impugned judgment dated 11.05.2011 was scrutinized, which relied on a High Court of Delhi Division Bench judgment in ITA No. 462 of 2009. The apex court concurred with the detailed analysis in the judgment, specifically focusing on the correct construction of Section 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act. The court, after hearing arguments, concluded that no further additions were necessary to the judgment, and they agreed with its findings. Consequently, all the appeals were disposed of in accordance with the aforementioned judgment.Moreover, the Supreme Court also addressed several Special Leave Petitions (SLPs) in light of the order passed in Civil Appeal No. 3961 of 2013 and others. These SLPs were also disposed of based on the same reasoning and conclusions as the main civil appeals. The disposal of the SLPs aligned with the overarching decision made in the primary judgment regarding the interpretation of Section 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act. The court's consistent approach in disposing of the SLPs underscores the uniformity in its application of legal principles across related cases, ensuring coherence and efficiency in the adjudicative process.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
