| |
| The Tax Publishers2020 TaxPub(DT) 1348 (Del-HC) INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 2(22)(e)
Where assessee failed to give the adequate evidence and cogent, reliable, and credible evidences about the transaction and no documentary evidence could be produced before AO, further Tribunal's decision was based upon an independent analysis of the facts, therefore appeal of assessee was accordingly dismissed.
|
Dividend - Deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e) - Advance amount received by assessee -
Assessee was aggrieved by an order of Tribunal which upheld AO's determination with respect to the addition made under section 2(22)(e). It was urged that Tribunal felt into error in not noticing the true nature of the transaction for refund of advance amounts received by assessee from the vendee company of which, he was a director. Held: Assessee failed to give the adequate evidence and cogent, reliable, and credible evidences about the transaction and no documentary evidence could be produced before AO. This Court was of the opinion that Tribunal's decision was based upon an independent analysis of the facts. At the same time all its findings are based upon appreciation of material facts. The acceptance of one view on facts as against another, unless it showed to be wholly unreasonable, cannot be subject matter of an appeal. Thus, appeal of assessee was accordingly dismissed.
REFERRED :
FAVOUR : Against the assessee
A.Y. :
 SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT
|