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>Tribunal Confirms CIT(A)'s Decision: No Tax Evasion in Dividend Case, Revenue's Appeal Dismissed for Lack of Evidence.</h1> <h3>ACIT Circle 8 (1) New Delhi Versus M/s Earth stone Holding (Two) Pvt. Ltd.</h3> ACIT Circle 8 (1) New Delhi Versus M/s Earth stone Holding (Two) Pvt. Ltd. - TMI Issues:The issues in this case involve the deletion of an addition made by the Assessing Officer (AO) on account of excess dividend received by the assessee, and whether the assessee evaded taxes through a colorable device.Issue 1: Deletion of Addition of Excess Dividend:The appellant received a sum of Rs. 27,72,22,273/- on account of dividend from M/s Jubilant Enpro Pvt. Ltd. (JEPL) upon redemption of 14% Cumulative Non-convertible Redeemable Preference Shares (CNCRPS). The AO observed that the assessee received excess dividend of Rs. 8,12,22,273/- and sought clarification on the reason for this excess. The appellant explained that the terms were modified by JEPL to compound the dividend annually at 14% in accordance with the Companies Act. The CIT(A) held that the modification of terms was valid, DDT was paid by JEPL, and the appellant was entitled to treat the dividend as exempt u/s 10(34) of the Act. Therefore, the addition made by the AO was deleted.Issue 2: Allegation of Tax Evasion Through Colorable Device:The Department of Revenue contended that the appellant evaded taxes by resorting to a colorable device, as evidenced by the transaction with JEPL. The Departmental Representative argued for the reversal of the CIT(A)'s decision based on the Assessment Order. However, the Assessee's Representative defended the CIT(A)'s findings, stating that the Revenue's grounds of appeal lacked merit. After hearing both parties, the Tribunal found no error in the CIT(A)'s decision and dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue.Conclusion:The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the addition of excess dividend, as the modification of terms by JEPL was done in compliance with the Companies Act and DDT was duly paid. The Tribunal also rejected the Revenue's claim of tax evasion through a colorable device, finding no basis to overturn the CIT(A)'s ruling. Therefore, the appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed on 5th October, 2023.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
