Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal / NCLT & Others
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        2012 (10) TMI 469 - AT - Income Tax

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Tribunal rules deemed dividend deletion valid & additional income tax unjustified in assessment appeal The Tribunal upheld the deletion of Rs.1,23,50,000 as deemed dividend in assessment year 2007-08, ruling that the provisions of section 2(22)(e) did not ...
                        Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                            Tribunal rules deemed dividend deletion valid & additional income tax unjustified in assessment appeal

                            The Tribunal upheld the deletion of Rs.1,23,50,000 as deemed dividend in assessment year 2007-08, ruling that the provisions of section 2(22)(e) did not apply as the appellant company was not a shareholder in the paying company. Additionally, the Tribunal found the addition of Rs.15 lakhs unjustified, as the statement made during the survey only referred to paying a tax of Rs.5,00,000 without mentioning additional income tax, leading to the deletion of the said amount and allowing the assessee's appeal.




                            Issues Involved:
                            1. Interpretation of provisions of section 2(22)(e) of the Act regarding deemed dividend.
                            2. Addition of Rs.1,23,50,000 as deemed dividend in assessment year 2007-08.
                            3. Confirmation of addition of Rs.15 lakhs by the Assessing officer.
                            4. Whether the statement made at the time of survey justified the addition.

                            Interpretation of Provisions of Section 2(22)(e) - Deemed Dividend:
                            The primary issue revolved around the interpretation of provisions of section 2(22)(e) of the Act concerning deemed dividend. The Revenue contended that the CIT(A) erred in not taxing the deemed dividend received by the assessee from M/s. Golden Gate Properties Ltd. The assessing officer had added Rs.1,23,50,000 as deemed dividend, which was later deleted by the CIT(A). The CIT(A) based the deletion on decisions by the Allahabad High Court and the Special Bench of the Tribunal, stating that the provisions of section 2(22)(e) do not apply if the recipient company is not a shareholder in the paying company. As the appellant company was not a shareholder in M/s. Golden Gate Properties Ltd., the addition was deemed unsustainable under the law. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, citing relevant judicial pronouncements, and dismissed the Revenue's appeal.

                            Addition of Deemed Dividend - Assessment Year 2007-08:
                            The factual background involved the assessee receiving money from M/s. Golden Gate Properties Ltd., leading to a dispute on whether it constituted deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e) of the Act. The assessing officer added Rs.1,23,50,000 as deemed dividend, which was later deleted by the CIT(A) and further upheld by the Tribunal. The decision was based on the fact that the appellant company was not a shareholder in M/s. Golden Gate Properties Ltd., and thus, the provisions of section 2(22)(e) did not apply. The Tribunal confirmed the CIT(A)'s order, dismissing the Revenue's appeal.

                            Confirmation of Addition of Rs.15 Lakhs:
                            The issue involved the confirmation of an addition of Rs.15 lakhs made by the Assessing officer based on a statement made by the Director of the assessee company during a survey. The Director had offered to pay a tax of Rs.5,00,000 for the assessment year 2007-08, but the assessing officer added Rs.15,00,000 to cover the income related to the additional tax admitted during the survey. The CIT(A) confirmed this addition, leading to the assessee's appeal. The Tribunal, after examining the statement made by the Director, concluded that the addition was not justified as the Director's offer was specific to paying a tax of Rs.5,00,000 and not additional income tax. The Tribunal found the addition baseless and lacking substantiating material, hence deleting it and allowing the assessee's appeal.

                            Statement Made at the Time of Survey Justification:
                            The statement made by the Director at the time of survey played a crucial role in justifying the addition of Rs.15 lakhs by the Assessing officer. However, the Tribunal found that the statement only referred to the payment of a tax of Rs.5,00,000 for the assessment year 2007-08, without indicating additional income tax. The Tribunal also noted the absence of any incriminating material or deficiencies in the books of account to support the addition. Consequently, the Tribunal deemed the addition unjustified and lacking legal merit, leading to its deletion and allowing the assessee's appeal.

                            In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal regarding the deemed dividend addition and allowed the assessee's appeal concerning the addition of Rs.15 lakhs, based on the specific circumstances and legal interpretations outlined in the judgment.
                            Full Summary is available for active users!
                            Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                            Topics

                            ActsIncome Tax
                            No Records Found