https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=243878 A shareholder-director holding more than 10% voting power in a closely held company received sums over and above the opening credit balance in his account, and the company had accumulated profits sufficient to cover the advance. On these facts, the excess receipt was treated as a loan or advance rather than a mere continuation of a running account, so it fell within deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The business expediency argument was rejected as inapplicable on the facts, and the addition was upheld. en-us Fri, 07 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 12 Feb 2014 15:16:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=243878 A shareholder-director holding more than 10% voting power in a closely held company received sums over and above the opening credit balance in his account, and the company had accumulated profits sufficient to cover the advance. On these facts, the excess receipt was treated as a loan or advance rather than a mere continuation of a running account, so it fell within deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The business expediency argument was rejected as inapplicable on the facts, and the addition was upheld. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 07 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=243878