2015 (12) TMI 351

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... filed:- "1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 10,00,000/- made by the AO as deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e) without appreciating the fact that the interest free amount of Rs. 10,00,000/- advanced to the assessee by the company, in which the assessee is 50% shareholder, was neither a trade advance in normal commercial expediency, because no supporting documents exists, nor the premises were given to the said company on leave and licence." 2. The facts in brief are that the assessee filed its return of income on 26.07.2007, declaring total income of Rs. 13,29,47,187/-. The return was processed u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act,1961(Hereinafter ca....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s purpose for the said loan and hence Rs. 10,00,000.00 was brought to tax as deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) of the Act. 3. Aggrieved by the order of the assessing officer the assessee carried the matter in appeal to the CIT(A) and contended that the funds have been obtained by the assessee towards business purpose and the said company intended to buy office premises at Kalina, Santacruz (E), Mumbai. The assessee submitted that the said company Mahavir Dwellers Private Limited is using the office of the assessee since its incorporation and the said company wanted the office for its business either on leave or license basis or outright purchase. Since, the assessee has already booked the office premises at 4th and 5th Floor with Kalamboli St....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....eement dated 21.11.2008 and the assessee started refunding their money from 17.11.2008 onwards and as on 12.10.2009, the assessee had to repay the balance amount of Rs. 96,70,000/- as on that date which was completed on 12.10.2009. The assessee received the possession of the said two floors on 5th January 2012 as against the promised date of December 2008. The assessee has also submitted that the CIT(A)-34, has in the assessee's own case for assessment year 2008-09, deleted the similar addition made u/s 2(22)(e) of the Act based upon the same facts and circumstances of the case after calling for the remand report from the assessing officer Similarly for assessment year 2009-10, the CIT(A) has deleted the addition. The CIT(A) for the impugne....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....has found reference also in ITAT appeal orders in appeal no ITA No.5615/Mum/2012 dated 29th June 2015 for assessment year 2008-09 as under: "15. The assessee carried the matter before the Ld. CIT(A) and furnished certain additional evidences in support of his contention that the transaction was purely for commercial reasons and the amount was taken for the purchase of office premises. The additional evidence were transmitted to the AO calling for his remand report by the Ld. CIT(A). 15.1 After verifying the details submitted by the assessee along with the documentary evidences, the AO in his remand report finally concluded: " The additional evidences submitted by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) and the sequence of events narrate....