TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (2) TMI 263
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., 1961 ('the Act' in short), relating to the Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: "1. That the learned CIT(A) has erred in considering repayment of deposit by the company of Rs. 25,00,000/- to the appellant as deemed dividend u/s. 2(22)(e) of the Act and thereby confirming the addition made by the assessing officer of Rs. 25,00,000/-. 2. That the various reason advanced by leaned CIT(A) in considering repayment of deposit of Rs. 25,00,000/- as deemed dividend u/s. 2(22)(e) of the Act are contrary to the facts of the case and the evidence on records. That the learned CIT(A) has misconstrued the provisions of section 2(22)(e) of the act. 3. That appellant respectful....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cided on the basis of documents available on record. 4.1 The primary dispute revolves around the disallowance of deduction of Rs. 25,00,000/- claimed u/s 80GGC of the Income Tax Act. As per the submissions of the appellant made during the course of assessment proceedings and before this office, the appellant has claimed deduction of the impugned amount of Rs. 25,00,000/- u/s 80GGC of the Act, which the appellant has claimed to have been paid by M/s Crystal Quinone Private Limited in which the appellant was a whole-time director and holding 57% shares. The appellant has further submitted that the donation was made by the company on behalf of the appellant by debiting the deposit account of the appellant with the company having credi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y evidence as to how the benefit of such payment is not derived by the appellant. The contention of the appellant that the payment doesn't represent fresh loan is of no avail to the appellant, as Sec 2(22)(e) of the Act not only covers payment which forms of fresh loans but also such transactions, benefits of which are derived by the shareholders. Hence, this is an indisputable fact that the appellant is a shareholder and it has derived benefit to the extent of Rs. 25,00,000/- in the form of deduction claimed u/s 80GGC in its ITR. 4.4 Without prejudice to the discussion made above, the facts and circumstances of the case that there is interchange of deduction from the ITR of the company to the ITR of the appellant also establis....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. In this case, the assessee who is the Managing Director of M/s Crystal Quinone Pvt. Ltd., holds 57% shareholding in the said company. During the relevant assessment year, the assessee was maintaining a deposit account with the company. As on 19.03.2015, the assessee had a credit balance of Rs. 4,04,73,030/- in his deposit account. On the instructions of the assessee, the company made payments of R.10,00,000/- on 20.03.2015 and Rs. 15,00,000/- on 25.03.2015, aggregating to Rs. 25,00,000/-, by debiting the assessee's deposit account, which facts are not in dispute. Even after such payments, the assessee continued to have a substantial credit balanc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rplus assets ; (ia) a distribution made in accordance with sub-clause (c) or sub-clause (d) in so far as such distribution is attributable to the capitalised profits of the company representing bonus shares allotted to its equity shareholders after the 31st day of March, 1964, and before the 1st day of April, 1965 ; (ii) any advance or loan made to a shareholder or the said concern by a company in the ordinary course of its business, where the lending of money is a substantial part of the business of the company ; (iii) any dividend paid by a company which is set off by the company against the whole or any part of any sum previously paid by it and treated as a dividend within the meaning of sub-clause (e), to the ....