2016 (11) TMI 661

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... deposited in the Bank, holding it as unexplained. 2. That the learned CIT(A) has further erred in confirming an addition of Rs. 4,96,196/- holding it as deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) of the Act. Other grounds raised are repetitive in nature. 3. The ld. Counsel for the assessee contends that in the original assessment, the ld. AO made the addition of all credit entries in the books of accounts amounting to Rs. 41,60,117/-. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred first appeal where additional evidence was filed and a remand report was called for. The ld. CIT(A), however, on estimated basis, retained the addition of Rs. 15,00,000/-. Thus, impliedly the break-up of Rs. 15,00,000/- is as under:- i) Opening cash balance - Rs. 55,27....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rly discharged primary onus in respect of all the inter-bank deposits in respective accounts; therefore, no addition u/s 69 is called for. 5. Apropos second ground, it is contended that the assessee was an employee director, having a running Current Account with the company M/s. Atiresh Trading Co. The assessee used to give advance amounts to company which was returned by company & vice versa as and when necessary. Thus, there was no element of loan or deposit in these transactions. They being purely need based current account transactions, there is no justification in deeming it to be deemed dividend and adding u/s 2(22)(e) of the Act. Reliance is placed on Hon'ble Gujarat High Court judgment in the case of CIT vs. Schutz Dishman Bio-Te....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....)(e) of the Act. 5. The issue is substantially one of appreciation of facts. When the CIT (Appeals) as well as Tribunal concurrently held that looking to large number of adjustment entries in the accounts between two entities, the amounts were not in the nature of loan or deposit, but merely adjustments, application of section 2(22)(e) of the Act would not arise. Consequently, no question of law arises. Tax appeals are dismissed." 6. Ld. DR, in reply, contends that the assessee's conduct from beginning has been evasive as no books of accounts were produced before the ld. AO and for the first time they were produced before the ld. CIT(A). The AO submitted his objections in the remand report called for in this behalf. Ld. CIT(A) w....