|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 81 to 100 of 200 Records
-
1979 (7) TMI 120 - ITAT DELHI-C
... ...
... ... ..... old that the report of the transferee s valuer, Shri Bhojraja, which was based on the comparable cases, provided that proper guidelines. In that view of the matter, the consideration shown in the instrument of transfer constituted the fair market value. While the assumption of jurisdiction by the IAC, Acquisition was in accordance with law, on merits we are unable to sustain the order acquiring the property under s. 269F(6). The order of the IAC, Acquisition is quashed accordingly. 9. As we have quashed the order of the IAC, Acquisition on facts, we need not go into the legal issues raised before us as also the other aspects obtaining in the case. 10. Before parting with this matter, we must express our appreciation of the assistance rendered by the Advocates of the transferee and the transferor, the valuer Shri Bhojraja as also the Sr. Departmental Representative and the Asstt. Valuation Officer, Shri Sada Ram. 11. In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed as above.
-
1979 (7) TMI 119 - ITAT CUTTACK
... ...
... ... ..... the assessee contended that in consideration of the past records of the assessee the lower authorities were not justified in estimating the value of this land at Rs. 2,61,600. He contended that this land was very low and was away from the road side. He, therefore, submitted that the value as estimated by the lower authorities for both the years under appeal was excessive. The learned Departmental Representative supporting the orders of the lower authorities contended that in view of sharp increase in the price of the land at Rourkela the lower authorities were justified in estimating the value of the assessee s land which was close to the city area at Rs. 800 per decimal. 8. After considering the past records of the assessee and keeping in view the probable increase in the price of lands in the contiguous area of Rourkela city, we deem it fair to estimate the value of this land of the assessee at Rs 100 per decimal. The WTO is directed to modify the assessments accordingly.
-
1979 (7) TMI 118 - ITAT BOMBAY-C
... ...
... ... ..... ee or these four relatives were given adequate opportunity of complying with the summons issued to them, because the exact date of service of the summons on them was not clear from the records. In any case, in view of the wide power of the AAC under r. 46A (4) and the fact that the ITO was given an opportunity to examine those books before the AAC acted on them we do not see any merit in the ground taken in this appeal. Coming to the explanation itself, we find that the assessee has been explaining consistently that the amounts did not belong to him but belonged to four relatives who withdrew the amount from the books of their commission agents. The reference to the two trusts at some later stage appears to be a result of some misunderstanding. Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion, that the AAC rightly accepted the explanation of the assessee as satisfactory. We, therefore, uphold his order. 6. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.
-
1979 (7) TMI 117 - ITAT BOMBAY-B
Revision, Orders Prejudicial To Revenue ... ... ... ... ..... Court in the cases of Premchand Sitanath Roy, v. Addl. CIT 1977 109 ITR 751 and Singho Mica Mining Co. Ltd. v. CIT 1978 111 ITR 231. 25. We have, thus, to hold that the Commissioner has jurisdiction under section 263 to revise the order of the ITO pertaining to interest refundable under section 214. However, on merits, we find that the order passed by the ITO in this behalf is supported by a number of the Tribunal s orders referred to by the Commissioner himself in paragraph 8 of his order. No doubt the Commissioner has not followed those decisions perhaps because the department has not accepted them. Be that as it may, we are in agreement with the decisions of the Tribunal relied upon by the assessee s counsel before the Commissioner and hold that on merits the order of the ITO was just and proper and the Commissioner was, therefore, not justified in holding that the assessee is not eligible to interest under section 214. 26. In the result, the assessee s appeal is allowed.
-
1979 (7) TMI 116 - ITAT AMRITSAR
... ...
... ... ..... he 9th or April,1964 when s. 271 as it stands amended, was on the statute book and, therefore, effect has to be given to that provisions. 4. What follows from the decision of the Punjab and Haryana High Court is that the law as obtaining on the date of filing of return when the offence of concealment is committed, will be applicable. Similar view was taken by the Madras High Court in 100 ITR, 170. The authority of Madras High Court in 100 ITR 170 which directly deals with the matter in issue being in conformity with the decision of Punjab and Haryana High Court (95 ITR 562) in whose jurisdiction we are acting, has to be accepted as compared to the Orissa High Court. We, therefore, hold that the jurisdiction to levy penalty was with the IAC and not with the ITO and the latter having exercised jurisdiction illegally, the entire penalty proceedings are vitiated. We, therefore, cancel the penalty without going into the merits of the case. 5. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1979 (7) TMI 115 - ITAT ALLAHABAD
... ...
... ... ..... ri Arjun Singh and Shri D.P. Dwivedi. Both of them are men of substantial landed property and to believe that they would not be able to advance Rs. 6,000 and Rs. 5,000 respectively to the assessee is, in our opinion, not justified. We are, entirely at one with the submissions of the ld. counsel for the assessee that the assessee has been able to discharge the burden, which lay upon him proving the nature and source of the investment that he was made in his building. If the Department did not want to believe the version given, they could have placed some evidence on record to show that what Shri Arjun Singh and Shri D.P. Dwivedi had said was not correct. Rejecting their evidence merely on the basis that it was not probable is, in our opinion, not justified for, according to us the paying capacity of the two persons is clearly established by their ownership of 50 bighas and 34 bighas of land respectively. We, accordingly delete the addition of Rs. 11,000 and allow this appeal.
-
1979 (7) TMI 114 - ITAT ALLAHABAD
... ...
... ... ..... jun Singh and Shri D.P. Dwivedi. Both of them are men of substantial landed property and to believe that they would not be able to advance Rs. 6,000 and Rs. 5,000 respectively to the assessee is, in our opinion, not justified. We are entirely at one with the submissions of the learned counsel for the assessee that the assessee has been able to discharge the burden, which lay upon him of proving the nature and source of the investment that he has made in his building. If the Department did not want to believe the version given, they could have placed some evidence on record to show that what Shri Arjun Singh and Shri D.P. Dwivedi had said was not correct. Rejecting their evidence merely on the basis that it was not probable is, in our opinion, not justified for, according to us the paying capacity of the two persons is clearly established by their ownership of 60 bighas and 34 bighas of land respectively. We accordingly delete the addition of Rs. 11,000 and allow this appeal.
-
1979 (7) TMI 113 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-B
... ...
... ... ..... aining the circumstances under which it was not able to fulfil its obligations. It is further noticed that the assessee made full payment of advance-tax between 3rd Jan., 1976 to 15th March, 1976 and it did meet with its liabilities of advance-tax though on a later date. The overall conduct of the assessee, therefore, cannot be said to contumacious nor could it be said that the assessee had acted in defiance of law or that it had purposefully avoided it legal obligation. The fact is that it was required to deposit its dues to the National Dairy Development Board and as such liquid funds were not available, to it though it had executed the work and the amount ordinarily was due. Taking overall view of the matter we are satisfied that this is not a fit case for imposition of penalty by treating the assessee as an assessee in default. We, therefore, quash the order of the authorities below and direct that penalty if paid should be refunded. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1979 (7) TMI 112 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-A
... ...
... ... ..... ed out, the letter of guarantee is merely a piece of evidence as to whether the succeeding sovereign would exercise the powers to repudiate or not. This evidence recedes into the background when we are faced with the actual repudiation itself by the succeeding sovereign in 1954. It is for the high contracting parties to set right these matters as it is well settled that the Municipal Courts cannot be the forum for enforcing such contracts. In view of this, we are of the opinion that the personal properties of the deceased also stood on the same footing as the State of Sagbara. This also did not pass on his death. 40. So, we give a finding that no property passed on the death of the Vasava in 1955. Therefore, there is no question of levy of any estate duty thereon. In view of this finding, it is unnecessary for us to go into the question of valuation of the properties, which is the second limb of the Accountable Person s appeal. 41. The Accountable Person s appeal is allowed.
-
1979 (7) TMI 111 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Gold control - Confiscation ... ... ... ... ..... the burden is initially heavy on the department, and the burden cannot be held to have been discharged by visual inspections by the Respondents No. 2 and 3. On this short ground itself, the petition deserves to be allowed. As the order of Confiscation of hair pins is required to be set aside, the consequential order imposing punishment must also be set aside. The show cause notice issued on June 8th, 1973, on the petitioner to explain why the licence issued under Gold (Control) Act should not be cancelled must also be quashed because this show cause notice was issued only on the basis of order of confiscation and penalty imposed by the Respondents 2 and 3. 7. In the result, the petition succeeds and the rule is made absolute in terms of prayer (a) and (b) of paragraph 16 of the petition. The respondents are directed to return the articles seized to the petitioners within a period of four weeks from to-day. In the circumstances of the case, there will be no order as to costs.
-
1979 (7) TMI 110 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Import by repatriate to India from Kenya ... ... ... ... ..... partner of the firm owned car from July 1970 for a period of more than one year and that period should be attached to the period from which he becomes the owner of the car to hold that the petitioner was entitled to the advantage of notification. It is not possible to give such construction to the terms of the notification. The wording of the notification is very clear and repatriate who desires to claim exemption must establish that he was owner of the car for a period of one year immediately prior to the date of his arrival. It is not open for a repatriate to contend that the department should take into consideration the period even prior to one year, of his arrival for considering the ownership of the petitioner. In my judgment the department was right in holding that the petitioner is not entitled to claim exemption under notification dated November 6,1972 and levying of duty was perfectly legal. 4. In the result, the petition fails and the rule is discharged with costs.
-
1979 (7) TMI 109 - HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Seizure - Jurisdiction - Goods of Nepalese origin, if checked by land customs authorities - Nepal Treaty of Trade and Transit Agreement of Co-operation
-
1979 (7) TMI 108 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
Cotton Felts and Woollen Felts - Classification - Words and Phrases - Validity ... ... ... ... ..... of Gujarat High Court in the case of M/s. Vijay Textile v. Union of India (1979 E.L.T. J 181 judgment dated 24-1-79) in which the Court held that fabric means woven material. 7. In view of the foregoing, Government are of the view that the Assistant Collector had rightly held that the impugned goods should be classified as fabrics and charged to duty accordingly. As such the Appellate Collector erred in holding that the two aforesaid judgments, one of Supreme Court and other of Punjab High Court would be applicable in this case. Therefore, for the reasons set out above, Government of India set aside the orders-in-appeal dated 6-7-1977 and 14-11-1977 thereby restoring the order of the Assistant Collector. Government also reject the Revision Applications filed against the earlier orders-in-appeal. In the result the cotton felts and woollen felts manufactured by the petitioners are held as classifiable under Tariff Item 19 and 21 respectively and chargeable to duty accordingly.
-
1979 (7) TMI 107 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Cross examination - Speaking orders on appeals and revisions - Departmental enquiries - Validity of
-
1979 (7) TMI 106 - HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Revision treated as Appeal - Validity in terms of customs ... ... ... ... ..... ority to treat the same as an appeal under section 128 of the Act and deal with the same, as an appeal. 8. For the reasons above, the petitioner is entitled to succeed in this application. The Appellate Collector of Customs in the impugned order dated the 30th March, 1974 has found clearly that there was no manner of doubt that the consignment in dispute was properly classifiable under item 28(3) of the Indian Customs Tariff read with its footnote and was free of duty . Accordingly to remand the matter for fresh revision would be an idle formality, A writ in the nature of certiorari will issue to set aside the three impugned orders respectively dated the 12th June, 1972, the 17th April, 1973 and the 30th March, 1974. A writ in the nature of Mandamus will also issue directing the respondents to act according to law and refund the said sum of Rs. 46,605.63 to the petitioner expeditiously. 9. The Rule is made absolute to the extent aforesaid. There will be no order as to costs.
-
1979 (7) TMI 105 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
Medicines - Analgin injection - Dutiability ... ... ... ... ..... Medicines is quite clear and specific. As per this description, any drug and medicinal preparation which is not specified in a monograph in a pharmacopoeia would be covered by the aforesaid tariff item. In view of the foregoing Government are of the view that in the absence of a specific monograph for Analgin Injection in the USSR-P, Analgin Injection would be leviable to duty under tariff Item 14-E. Consequently, in exercise of the powers under section 36(2) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, Government of India have no hesitation in coming to the conclusion that the Appellate Collector erred in holding the product in question as falling outside the scope of the term patent or propriety medicine and therefore set aside the impugned order in appeal dated 16-6-1978 so as to restore the order of the Assistant Collector and the consequential demand issued by him by holding that the Analgin Injection is leviable to duty under Tariff Item 14E of the Central Excise Tariff.
-
1979 (7) TMI 104 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Manufacture - Stage of completion of a manufactured product ... ... ... ... ..... the advantage of notification Exhibit B is still available and no duty can be levied on vegetable non-essential oil. In fact Mr. Dalal rightly submitted that this alternative contention raised by Mr. Desai was neither argued before the authorities below nor a contention has been raised anywhere in the present petition and the petitioners should not be permitted to advance contentions only at the stage of arguments. I have considered the submissions of Mr. Desai on merits and I found it unsustainable. In these circumstances, the show cause notice issued by the Department were perfectly valid and the orders passed by the authorities below do not require any interference in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. The petition fails and the rule is discharged with costs. The petitioners had furnished bank guarantee as per interim orders passed by this Court. The Department would not recover the amount by enforcing the guarantee for a period of four weeks from today.
-
1979 (7) TMI 103 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Valuation - Trade discount admissibility even on goods used for captive consumption - Concession
-
1979 (7) TMI 102 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Data Processing Machines (AS IS Machines) - Precedent - Revisionary order - Binding effect - Data processing machines
-
1979 (7) TMI 101 - HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA (FULL BENCH)
`Attempt to export' - `Export goods' - Notice ... ... ... ... ..... or proper for this Bench to make any pronouncement on the correctness or otherwise of the actual decision of the Division Bench in the case of Jute Investment Co. Ltd., 77 CWN 501 and in the case of Thomas Duff Co. (India) P. Ltd., 1976 Calcutta High Court Notes 242 (also 80 CWN 305). As rightly pointed out the said decisions had rested on a number of grounds. The views expressed by the Division Benches in the said two cases on the questions referred to this Bench, must, however, be over-ruled to the extent that the view expressed therein are contrary to or inconsistent with the views expressed by us on these questions. On these questions the views expressed by the Division Bench in the case of Assistant Collector of Customs, Special Section, Calcutta v. United India Minerals Ltd., AIR 1976 Cal. 21 (also reported in 79 CWN 900) meet with our approval in so far as the said views are in accord with the views expressed by us. Questions answered accordingly. No order as to costs.
........
|
