2016 (11) TMI 1017

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....itions of Rs. 1,17,89,159/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) of the I.T. Act, 1961." 3. Counsel for the appellant, Mr. R.B. Mathur, has taken us to the order of the CIT (Appeals) and contended that the interest free advances given by the company has been assessed only with a view to reduce the profit of the company and to make it available to HUF which had made losses. In that view of the matter, he has placed reliance on the decision of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Mukundray K. Shah (2007) 290 ITR 433 (SC) wherein it has been observed at page 448 as under: "The above two judgments indicate that the question as to whether payment made by the company is for the benefit of the a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... assessee and his family members properties have not been properly appreciated. Beside it has been demonstratively explained that assessee being MD and pioneer of the company had to carry on bulk of business transactions like, purchases, sales, overseas operations, the impugned account was the means to carry out such operations. To be fair, assessee paid interest on the remaining amount which has been taxed in the hands of the company. All these justifications have not been effectively controverted by ld. AO and have been duly considered by ld. CIT (A). A series of earlier years litigation reflects that the issue of addition u/s 2(22)(e) was not agitated in earlier years, consequently assessee's reliance on Hon'ble Supreme Court jud....