S. 2(22)(a)/2(24)(iv):
Occupancy rights to shareholder taxable as “deemed dividend” but
not as “benefit or perquisite”
Shantikumar D Majithia vs. DCIT
(ITAT Mumbai)
The assessee was the substantial
shareholder of a closely held company which owned a building. The Articles of
the company provided that each shareholder would have occupancy rights to a
flat on the condition that an interest-free refundable deposit be paid. The
occupancy rights were transferable. The AO held that the grant of occupancy
rights by the company amounted to a “distribution of assets” and that the same was
assessable as “deemed dividend” in the hands of the assessee u/s 2(22)(a)
to the extent of the accumulated profits. On appeal, the CIT(A) held that as
the occupancy rights were given against payment of a refundable deposit, there
was no “distribution
of assets” and so no deemed dividend. Instead, he held that the
occupancy rights conferred a “benefit/perquisite” on the assessee which was
assessable u/s 2(24)(iv). On cross appeals before the Tribunal, HELD:
(i) U/s 2(22)(a), any
distribution by a company of accumulated profits, whether capitalized or not,
constitutes “dividend” if such distribution entails the release by the
company to its shareholders of all or any part of the assets. As the assessee
received the occupancy rights to the flat in perpetuity and could transfer
them, it effectively meant that he had full ownership over the flat.
Accordingly, the value of the flats was assessable as deemed dividend u/s
2(22)(a);
(ii) However, as the said
occupancy rights were given in lieu of holding shares and an interest-free
refundable deposit towards proportionate land cost and development cost and
were transferable, there is no “benefit or perquisite” which is assessable u/s
2(24)(iv).
No comments:
Post a Comment