https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202899 A payment by a closely held company to a substantial shareholder was treated as a loan or advance and brought within deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e) because the surrounding facts showed no genuine security deposit and the amount reduced the shareholder's debit balance. Expenditure on maintenance charges, late construction fees and similar items was not accepted as cost of improvement for capital gains, as upkeep without real physical addition does not amount to improvement. The date of acquisition issue was remitted for fresh factual determination because possession under section 2(47)(v) and section 53A was not clearly established. A set-off of business loss was allowed even though not claimed by revised return. en-us Fri, 27 Aug 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 31 May 2013 18:39:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202899 A payment by a closely held company to a substantial shareholder was treated as a loan or advance and brought within deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e) because the surrounding facts showed no genuine security deposit and the amount reduced the shareholder's debit balance. Expenditure on maintenance charges, late construction fees and similar items was not accepted as cost of improvement for capital gains, as upkeep without real physical addition does not amount to improvement. The date of acquisition issue was remitted for fresh factual determination because possession under section 2(47)(v) and section 53A was not clearly established. A set-off of business loss was allowed even though not claimed by revised return. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 27 Aug 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202899