2012 (3) TMI 324

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sp; For Respondent: Mr. C.S. Aggarwal, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Prakash Kumar, Advocate. O R D E R In the cause list ITA No. 333/2006, Commissioner of Income Tax versus M/s Gopal Clothing Company Private Limited, which pertains to assessment year 1996-97, is listed. However, we notice that along with the said appeal, the Registry has also enclosed files of ITA Nos. 732/2004, 739/2004, 722/20....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... to the transaction in question, in the facts and circumstances of the present case?" 4. The respondent assessee is a company and had 10 shares in East India Impex (Delhi) Private Limited. The assessee did not hold 10% or more voting rights in East India Impex (Delhi) Private Limited. The Assessing Officer invoked Section 2(22)(e) of the Act on the ground that one Subhash Sahni had more than 10....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Rs.77,49,000/- for the assessment years 1994-95, 1996-97 and 1997-98 respectively. The reduction was made by the CIT(Appeals) on the ground that certain amounts had been repaid and that cannot be treated and regarded as deemed dividend. The Assessing Officer, we may note had computed the deemed dividend by taking into account the debit balance at the end of the year but did not reduce from the sai....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d not have the prescribed voting rights. The tribunal also examined the merits of the case and held that the transactions between the assessee and the East India Impex (Delhi) Private Limited were business transactions and cannot be treated as loans or advance. 7. We need not examine the second aspect on merits. The first aspect, i.e., whether or not the respondent assessee had the requisite vo....