Income Tax : Courts have held that reopening an assessment on identical facts under a different deeming provision is invalid. The key takeaway ...
Income Tax : Learn about deemed dividends under Section 2(22) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, its implications, and key judicial precedents relate...
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 : ITAT Kolkata held that a loan received by a company that was not a shareholder of the lender could not be taxed as deemed dividend...
Income Tax : The ITAT Delhi held that an interest-bearing loan can still be taxed as deemed dividend where all statutory conditions under Secti...
Income Tax : Calcutta High Court held that deemed dividend under Section 2(22)(e) can be taxed only in the hands of a registered or beneficial ...
Income Tax : The Tribunal ruled that deemed dividend provisions require evidence of withdrawal from a company in which the assessee is a shareh...
Income Tax : The Bangalore ITAT ruled that once substantive addition under Section 2(22)(e) is sustained in the managing partners case, the cor...
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 Kolkata held that loan transaction between holding and subsidiary company done in the normal course of business and out of business/ commercial expediency are outside the scope of deemed dividend.
ITAT Mumbai held that trade advances, being in the nature of commercial transaction, would not fall within the ambit of the provisions of section 2(22)(e) of the Act and therefore the addition made by the AO is deleted. Accordingly, appeal allowed.
Delhi High Court held that Section 260A of the Income Tax Act refrains from incorporating a specific provision permitting the filing of a cross-objection. Thus, cross objection would not be maintainable.
ITAT Hyderabad held that trade advances, in the nature of commercial transactions, cannot be characterized as ‘loans or advance’ constituting deemed dividend within the meaning of section 2(22)(e). Thus, addition towards deemed dividend untenable.
Kerala High Court held that court cannot interfere with order of settlement commission if challenge is merely that Settlement Commission has chosen to take one of two possible views that can be legally taken in respect of an issue. Accordingly, writ disposed of.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that entire assessments has been restored to the file of CIT(A) for de novo consideration since assessee was found to be absolutely non-cooperative and took every step to thwart/stonewall the assessment proceedings.
Delhi High Court held that validity of reassessment under section 148 of the Income Tax Act has to be determined based on original reasons disclosed to the assessee. Such reasons cannot be improved upon subsequently.
Telangana High Court held that accumulated profits under section 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act are to be computed taking into account the depreciation as per the Income-tax Rules. Thus, matter decided in favour of the assessee.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that addition u/s. 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act is liable to be set aside since advance was received was merely recorded as journal entry and no sum was received by the assessee. Thus, appeal allowed.
ITAT Delhi held that expense incurred by holding company on behalf of subsidiary company which is not in the nature of loan cannot be treated as deemed dividend u/s. 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act.
