TREATEMENT OF LOAN GIVEN TO M.D'S WIFE.can you answer this?
This query is : Resolved
29 August 2009
Mr X is MD of of ABCD&SONS PVT LTD.
COMPANY HAD ACCUMULATED PROFITS OF RS.750000 AS ON 31.03.2008.
IT GRANTS LOAN OF RS.450000 TO HIS(MR. x, MD) WIFE ON 01.06.2008 FOR PURCHASES OF HOUSE, WHICH WAS REPAID ON 31.12.2008
THE COMPANY CHARGED NO INTEREST ON THE SAID LOAN.
EXAMINE THE CONSEQUENCES OF THESE TRANSACTIONS.
MAKE YOUR OWN ASSUMPTIONS...
(in contest of income from house property.)
MAIL ID :bujji.manu@yahoo.co.in
COMPANY HAD ACCUMULATED PROFITS OF RS.750000 AS ON 31.03.2008.
IT GRANTS LOAN OF RS.450000 TO HIS(MR. x, MD) WIFE ON 01.06.2008 FOR PURCHASES OF HOUSE, WHICH WAS REPAID ON 31.12.2008
THE COMPANY CHARGED NO INTEREST ON THE SAID LOAN.
EXAMINE THE CONSEQUENCES OF THESE TRANSACTIONS.
MAKE YOUR OWN ASSUMPTIONS...
(in contest of income from house property.)
MAIL ID :bujji.manu@yahoo.co.in
29 August 2009
Treated as a deemed dividend in the hands of assessee (i.e. Director).
29 August 2009
BUT THE LOAN WAS paid to MD wife
29 August 2009
Yes it is deemed dividend even though the advance ceased to be outstanding at the end of the previous year.
Citation:- 1) Smt. Tarulata Shyam Vs. CIT (1977) 108 ITR 345 (SC).
2) Miss. P. Sarada Vs. CIT (1998) 96 Taxman 11 (SC).
Citation:- 1) Smt. Tarulata Shyam Vs. CIT (1977) 108 ITR 345 (SC).
2) Miss. P. Sarada Vs. CIT (1998) 96 Taxman 11 (SC).
29 August 2009
does MD's wife covered under sec2(22)e ????
30 August 2009
Fact of repayment of loan is not relevant - The Legislature has deliberately not made the subsistence of the loan or advance, or its being outstanding on the last date of the previous year relevant to the assessment year, a prerequisite for raising the statutory fiction. In other words, even if the loan or advance ceased to be outstanding at the end of the previous year, it can still be deemed as a ‘dividend’ if the other four conditions factually exist to the extent of the accumulated profits possessed by the company. - Smt. Tarulata Shyam v. CIT [1977] 108 ITR 345 (SC) [See also Miss P. Sarada v. CIT [1998] 96 Taxman 11 (SC)].
You need to be the querist or approved CAclub expert to take part in this query .
Click here to login now
Click here to login now
Similar Resolved Queries
Unanswered Queries
- Supply through E-commerce Operators
- STCG....................................................
- Sales return eway bill
- AMOUNT RECEIVED UNDER COMPULOSRY ACQUISITION OF AGRICULTURAL LAND
- Relief u/s Section 89
- TAN for Partnership
- Is it compulsory to File 10E if Income including Pension Arrears is below 12 Lakh for the F Y 25 26
- Is E Way Bill Valid If Transport ID Not Mentioned in PART A But Vehicle details mentioned in PART B
- E way bill for tractors
- Specified Profession
- Section 54F - Exemption on LTCG in 2026 for HP purchased in 2023
- Sales amount in Gstr1
- CG after sale of flat
- E Commerce GSTR1 & 3B how to file
- Nomination of Bank for refund in itr 2
- GST Cancellation without jurisdiction
- Legal Opinion on Registrar's Refusal to Investigate a Society for Non-Renewal and Non-Compliance
- GST Refund_RFD-01
- Form10BD was uploaded successfully without any Error but after 24 hours, Form10BE are not available
- Annexure B utility for GST Refund
Trending Online Classes
-
DT & Audit (Exam Oriented Fastrack Batch) - For May 26 Exams and onwards Full English
CA Bhanwar Borana & CA Shubham Keswani
Subscribe to Pro
Join an elite circle of professionals
CAclubindia
