Income Tax : Gain insights on Deemed Dividends under the Income Tax Act: Understand taxability, TDS applicability, and key exemptions for optim...
CA, CS, CMA : Explore intricacies of deemed dividends in India. Understand definitions, applicable transactions, and tax implications. Uncover i...
Income Tax : The dividend income received by non-resident individuals, including Foreign Portfolio Investors (FPIs) and Non-Resident Indian cit...
Income Tax : Understand the tax implications of bonus shares in deemed dividends. Explore the case of PCIT vs. Dr. Ranjan Pai and its impact on...
Income Tax : The meaning of the expression ‘substantial part of business’ for the purpose of Section 2(22)(e) Introduction Section ...
Income Tax : Read about the ITAT Chennai case between DCIT and Gemini Traze RFID Pvt. Ltd. regarding deemed dividend status under Section 2(22)...
Income Tax : In DCIT Vs Eko Diagnostic Pvt. Ltd., ITAT Kolkata rules that Section 2(22) of Income Tax Act doesn't apply to non-beneficiary shar...
Income Tax : Apeejay Surrendra Management Services Pvt Ltd Vs DCIT (ITAT Kolkata) ITAT Kolkata held that deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e)...
Income Tax : In ACIT Vs Adiish Jain, ITAT Delhi ruled on deemed dividend under IT Act, deleting the addition. Detailed analysis of the case & j...
Income Tax : Legal fiction created u/s. 2 (22)(e) enlarges definition of dividend only and legal fiction is not to be extended further for broa...
Income Tax : Section 2(22) clause (e) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) provides that dividend includes any payment by a company, not being...
ITAT Mumbai held that while determining the amount of deemed dividend under Explanation 2 to Section 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act, the current profit is not to be included to be part of accumulated profit.
Held that if such loan or advances given to such shareholder as a consequence of any further consideration, which is beneficial to the company received from such shareholder then in such advance or loan cannot be said to be deemed dividend within the ambit of section 2(22)(e) of the Act.
Mahimananda Mishra Vs ACIT (Orissa High Court) A plain reading of ection 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 indicates that the taxing of the deemed dividend has to be in the hands of the shareholder of OSL. In the present case, admittedly it is Mr. Mishra in his individual capacity who holds 36.95% of […]
Sanjay Subhashchand Gupta Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) Assessee contended that the impugned amounts were taken for the purpose of business activities of the company and the advance of Rs.14,44,730/- from M/s. Rustogi Logistic Pvt. Ltd. and Rs.3,35,38,660/- from M/s. Rustogi Projects Private Limited and the same was received as business advances. The ld. AR further […]
ACIT Vs Bhagwati Coal Movers (P) Ltd. (ITAT Delhi) ITAT Delhi held that the ‘Security Premium Reserve’ cannot be regarded as part of accumulated profits under Section 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act. Facts- AO observed that the assessee has obtained loan amounting to Rs.5,52,50,000/- from M/s. Ajmala Stationery Ltd. A part of the loan […]
Assessee had not disputed that he is common shareholder in both companies, however, contended that provisions of section 2(22)(e) have no application, inasmuch as, loan advanced was in ordinary course of its business.
Assessee firm has obtained loans from the sister concern on commercial basis. On facts it has emerged that the lender company has charged interest on advances made to assessee firm. The assessee has taken plea that the advances made by the lender company to the borrower assessee firm is not a loan/advance but is beset with the character of quid pro quo owing to charge of interest for the benefit of lender company.
It is an admitted position that the alleged expenses incurred by the Assessee were business expenses of the company and therefore no personal benefit accrues to the Assessee as alleged by the authorities below. Hence, this Section 2(22)(e) of Income Tax Act, 1961 cannot be invoked by alleging that Assessee had benefitted.
Held that provision of deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) cannot be invoked unless the recipient of loan is a shareholder of the company. If recipient of loan is not shareholder in a company from which loan is received, such loan cannot be assessed as deemed divided.
DCIT Vs Essel Finance VKC Forex Ltd. (ITAT Chennai) assessee has advanced sum of Rs.7.5 Crores to another entity for taking a property on lease. The same has been treated by Ld. AO as deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) of the Act on the ground that one of the directors of the assessee company held substantial […]
