<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Deemed dividend – case of HUF , Karta , members and some related issues discussed in view of recent judgment of the Supreme Court. Suggestion to omit deeming provision in view of changed in circumstances..</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/article/detailed?id=7199</link>
    <description>Section 2(22)(e) treats certain company payments as deemed dividend where a registered shareholder has a substantial interest in a concern; the Supreme Court held the provision applied to loans to an HUF because the Karta, who was the registered shareholder and entitled to a substantial share of HUF income, caused the HUF to be a concern in which he had substantial interest under Explanation 3. The provision is a statutory fiction requiring strict interpretation, and doubts favor the assessee; the author urges repeal on policy and administrative grounds.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 11 Jan 2017 07:10:05 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 11 Jan 2017 07:10:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=454894" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Deemed dividend – case of HUF , Karta , members and some related issues discussed in view of recent judgment of the Supreme Court. Suggestion to omit deeming provision in view of changed in circumstances..</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/article/detailed?id=7199</link>
      <description>Section 2(22)(e) treats certain company payments as deemed dividend where a registered shareholder has a substantial interest in a concern; the Supreme Court held the provision applied to loans to an HUF because the Karta, who was the registered shareholder and entitled to a substantial share of HUF income, caused the HUF to be a concern in which he had substantial interest under Explanation 3. The provision is a statutory fiction requiring strict interpretation, and doubts favor the assessee; the author urges repeal on policy and administrative grounds.</description>
      <category>Articles</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 11 Jan 2017 07:10:05 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/article/detailed?id=7199</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>