- (1.) This Appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act), challenges the order dated 8th May, 2012 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (the Tribunal) for the Assessment Year 2007-08.
(2.) The Revenue has formulated the following reframed question of law for our consideration: Whether the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal is right in placing reliance on the judgment in the case of ACIT v/s. M/s. Bhaumik Colours Pvt. Ltd. whereas in the instant case, the assessee is a registered and beneficial share holder of a company that has given loans to a third company that lent these, monies to the Assessee .
(3.) We find that the impugned order has upheld the order of the CIT(A) dated 28th March, 2011, holding that the issue arising before it was covered by the decision of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in Bhaumik Colours Pvt. Ltd. 313 ITR 146 (AT) read with decision of this Court in CIT v/s. Universal Medicare Pvt. Ltd., 2010 324 ITR 263. It is pertinent to note that in paragraph 6 of the impugned order, Tribunal recorded as under: 6:- At the time of hearing, no one appeared on behalf of assessee in spite of giving notice. However, ld. D.R. fairly conceded that the issue involved is covered in favour of assessee by the decision of ITAT (SB) in the case of Bhaumik Colours P. Ltd. . Further, ld. D.R. referred to the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of L Alagusundaram Chettiar vs. CIT : 252 ITR 893 (SC) but when it was pointed out that the said decision pertains to section 2(6A)(e) of 1922 Act, and whereas the decision by ITAT in the case of Bhaumik Colours is under 1961 Act and similar view has been taken by Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Universal Medicare Private Limited, 2010 324 ITR 263, ld. D.R. submitted that she dutifully relies on the decision of Assessing Officer.;