https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217173 The Tribunal upheld the CIT (Appeals) order, dismissing the Revenue's appeal regarding the addition of deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e). The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, stating that since the assessee was not a shareholder of the sister concern, the loan amount could not be deemed dividend in its hands. Legal interpretations from the Mumbai Special Bench and the Hon'ble Bombay High Court supported this decision, emphasizing that for the provisions of section 2(22)(e) to apply, the payee must be a registered holder of shares. Consequently, the addition of deemed dividend was deleted in favor of the assessee. en-us Tue, 31 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 21 Jan 2013 11:49:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217173 The Tribunal upheld the CIT (Appeals) order, dismissing the Revenue's appeal regarding the addition of deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e). The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, stating that since the assessee was not a shareholder of the sister concern, the loan amount could not be deemed dividend in its hands. Legal interpretations from the Mumbai Special Bench and the Hon'ble Bombay High Court supported this decision, emphasizing that for the provisions of section 2(22)(e) to apply, the payee must be a registered holder of shares. Consequently, the addition of deemed dividend was deleted in favor of the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 31 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217173