|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 61 to 80 of 155 Records
-
1981 (11) TMI 95 - ITAT INDORE
... ...
... ... ..... orities with the remark that there was no such person with the name and address as given by the assessee. The AAC was of the view that the assessee has not given his proper address in the appeal form, and hence, it was not possible for him to give opportunity to the assessee to present this case. He decided the case Ex-parte. 4. The assessee has given his address as M/s Capital Auto Service. Obdellaganj, Bhopal. But as mentioned above, the AAC has stated that the notice was returned back unserved. We considered that it is incumbent on the part of the AAC to issue the notice to the correct address and even if necessary service of notices may be made through the concerned ITO. In this view of the matter, we set aside the order of the AAC impugned before us and we send back the case to his file for fresh disposal in accordance with the law after taking the above observations into account. 5. In the result the appeal by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.
-
1981 (11) TMI 94 - ITAT HYDERABAD
Hindu Succession Act, 1956, Individual Income ... ... ... ... ..... clearly declared that the properties belonged to his HUF after the death of his father on 26-6-1969, the property should be deemed to have been impressed with the character of joint family property. In support of his above contention the learned counsel had filed copies of statements filed by Shri Mohan Rao along with his wealth-tax returns for the assessment years 1970-71 and 1971-72 which had been accepted by the WTO and requested that this alternative submission should be admitted. Since all the facts are already on record and no fresh investigation is necessary, we admit this alternative ground now raised on behalf of the assessee. However, since this factual aspect was not specifically raised before the ITO nor considered by him, in the interest of justice, we direct the ITO to examine and consider this contention with reference to the materials available on record and decide the claim on merits and in accordance with law. 9. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part.
-
1981 (11) TMI 93 - ITAT DELHI-E
Dissolution Of Partnership ... ... ... ... ..... that the interest of a partner in the firm is movable property and reliance was placed on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Narayanappa v. Krishnappa, AIR 1966 SC 1300. 7. We have considered these arguments. In our opinion, the learned counsel for the assessee is correct in urging that the ruling relied on on behalf of the revenue has no application since the assessee had not purchased the property in this case. Registration of the deed is required only when the property is purchased. In this case the assessee had acquired the property on dissolution of the firm since the property fell to its share on settling of the accounts. Registration of the deed was not, therefore, required. There was no transfer of the property involved. Therefore, the assessee was entitled to depreciation and the order of the AAC directing that it should be allowed after enquiry is correct and is upheld. The appeal in this regard is dismissed. 8. The appeal is otherwise partly allowed.
-
1981 (11) TMI 92 - ITAT DELHI-E
... ...
... ... ..... ITR 694 (P and H) where their Lordships held that the right of appeal by an assessee is not barred where an assessment order is passed on the admission of the assessee. The admission made under misapprehension can be challenged in appeal before the AAC. 6. Looking to all these rulings and the facts of the case we are satisfied that the admission of the assessee to be assessed on an addition of Rs. 26,000 was brought about by a misapprehension that the ITO had detected a difference between the purchases and sales which in fact was not correct. Under the circumstances, therefore, interest of justice demands that the orders of the authorities below should be set aside and we do so. We direct the ITO to make the assessment afresh. If there are any defects in the books he should point them out and then decide whether any addition is called for and whether the results based on books of account needs to be rejected. 7. The appeal shall be treated as allowed for statistical purposes.
-
1981 (11) TMI 91 - ITAT DELHI-E
... ...
... ... ..... ssessee but it is not conclusive either way. The AAC was, therefore, wrong in laying stress on the failure to file applications for extension of time. She has also misstated the facts that Shri Lal was not authorised by the appellant to look after his tax affairs. The assessee is admittedly a non-resident and his affairs are being looked after by his brother-in-law who is a professional architect. The delay has obviously occurred because he could not collect the information in time. The facts do not lead to the conclusion that there was any conscious disregard of the obligation on the part of the assessee or any contumacious conduct which would invite levy of penalty. Merely because the return had been delayed penalty does not automatically follow. On the facts we are satisfied that there was reasonable cause for the delay in filing the returns. We, therefore, set aside the orders of the authorities below and cancel the penalties in both the years. 5. The appeals are allowed.
-
1981 (11) TMI 90 - ITAT DELHI-D
... ...
... ... ..... the contention of the ld. counsel of the assessee. A correct estimate of the current years income by a partner of the firm can be made only after obtaining his share income from the firm. In the present case, since the main sources of the assessee rsquo s income were share from the three firms and upto 15th Dec., 1975, the assessee was not in a position to obtain his share income from the said firms, the only alternative for the assessee was to base his estimate of income and make compulsory deposit as per the returned income for the asst. yr. 1974-75, which was filed on 31st Jan., 1975. In these circumstances, we are of the opinion that the shortfall In the amount of compulsory deposit is covered by a reasonable cause and, accordingly, we hold that the assessee is not liable to penalty under the provisions of s. 10 of the CDS (Income-tax Payers) Act, 1974. We, therefore, delete the penalty sustained by the AAC u/s 10 of the said Act. 8. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1981 (11) TMI 89 - ITAT DELHI-C
... ...
... ... ..... income-tax payable on the income so disclosed is deducible as a debt owed on the valuation date u/s 2 (m) of the WT Act, 1957, in computing the net wealth of the assessee. There is no dispute in the present case that the amount disclosed in the voluntary disclosure make in December, 1975 were included in the net principal value of the estate of the deceased for purpose of estate duty assessment as could be seen from pages 26 to 30 of the accountable person rsquo s paper book. In the circumstances, the Appellate Controller was fully justified in directing the Asstt. Controller to allow the accountable person rsquo s claim for deduction after ascertaining the correct amount of these liabilities. We respectfully follow this decision of the Supreme Court and confirm the order of the Appellate Controller in this regard. 10. In the result, the accountable person rsquo s appeal in EDA No. 44/Del/80 is partly allowed and the Revenue rsquo s appeal in EDA No. 46/Del /80 is dismissed.
-
1981 (11) TMI 88 - ITAT DELHI-C
... ...
... ... ..... th the direction that he should dispose of the ground as reproduced above and thereafter proceed to decorate the appeal a fresh. 4. ITA No. 3137(Del)/81. The assessee purchased a house in the year 1973. For the earlier years, the income from SOP was taken at Rs. 1,800 as returned in view of the rateable value at Rs. 430. In this year the ITO enhanced the SOP to Rs. 6,000. The assessee went in appeal but failed. 5. After hearing both the parties, I am of the view that the SOP as shown by the assessee at Rs. 1800 should have been accepted because the same was being accepted in the past. The revenue authorities should not lightly departed from the past and create controversies which can be avoided otherwise. Keeping in view the rateable value, which is not disputed, the SOP as shown by the assessee being reasonable should have been accepted. I accept the same. 6. In the result, ITA No. 3137/(DEL)/81 is allowed and ITA NO. 3136 (DEL)/81 is partly allowed for statistical purposes.
-
1981 (11) TMI 87 - ITAT DELHI-B
... ...
... ... ..... , cancel the penalty levied in this case 6. Question No. 1 is not required to be referred because the question determined by the Tribunal in this case is a pure question of fact. Question No. 2 raised the point whether the onus that lies on the assessee had been discharged. The question whether the onus that lies on the assessee had been discharged or not is also a question of fact. In this connection, reference may be made to the judgements in R. B. Seth Champalal Ramswarup vs. CIT (1966) 60 ITR 493(SC), J.K. Cotton Spinning and Wearing Mills Co. Ltd. vs. CIT, U.P. (1967) 64 ITR 444 (All) and Addl. CIT vs. Bipan Lal Kuthiala (1975) question of fact. In this connection reference is made to the judgments in Anantharam Veerasinghaiah and Co. vs. CIT (1980) 16 CTR (SC) 189 (1980)123 ITR 457 (SC) and Addl. CIT vs. Rawalpindi Flour Mills (P) Ltd. (1980) 125 ITR 243 (All). Thus, no question of law is required to be referred. 7. In the result, the reference application is dismissed.
-
1981 (11) TMI 86 - ITAT DELHI-A
... ...
... ... ..... has to merely place materials of the primary facts or the circumstances which in all reasonable probability would show that he was not guilty of any fraud or gross or wilful neglect. Their Lordships also held that he may discharge this onus by placing the fact found in the assessment order to show that the facts found therein had not in the least given as inkling of fraud or gross or wilful neglect on the part of the assessee and, therefore, it must be held that without proof of any other fact there was no fraud committed by the assessee in his failure to return the correct income nor was he grossly or wilfully negligent. Under such circumstances, the assessee has to place only a probable case to prove that she was nto guilty of fraud or gross or wilful neglect. We, therefore, hold that the penalties levied by the WTO cannot be sustained. We, therefore, cancel the penalty orders of the WTO in both the assessment years. 10. In the result, both the appeals are allowed in full.
-
1981 (11) TMI 85 - ITAT DELHI-A
... ...
... ... ..... ds which the ITO perused. Under the circumstances, it cannot be said that the award was a new piece of evidence which the ITO was ignorant, we find that the CIT (A) has given cogent reasons for condoning the delay of the application in Form No. 11 filed on19th February, 1977. In view of the peculiar circumstances of the case, the delay of three months can be condoned. Under the proviso to s. 184(4) of the IT Act, 1961, the ITO has right to entertain an application made after the end of the previous year, if he is satisfied that the firm was prevented by sufficient cause from making the application before the end of the previous year. Under such circumstances, the CIT (A) was justified in condoning the delay. 11. In view of our discussions above, we uphold the order of the CIT (A) directing the ITO to allow registration to the firm if all the other conditions regarding the genuineness of the firm and other formalities were satisfied. 12. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.
-
1981 (11) TMI 84 - ITAT DELHI-A
Income, Chargeability Of ... ... ... ... ..... d by the assessee cannot thus be called as perquisite. Since the amount received cannot be considered as a perquisite, and since it is not a part of salary as said, the said amount cannot be taxed as income under the head Salaries . 12. Since we have held that the amount received by the assessee is not ab initio income and is thus not taxable under any head of income, there is no question of considering the question of exemption under section 10(14). In this view of the matter, it is not necessary to go into the case laws relied on by the parties on this point. 13. For the aforesaid reasons, we hold that the sum of Rs. 24,244 does not represent income of the assessee. As already stated, the learned counsel for the assessee did not rely on the argument that a part of the amount was spent on dresses, purchase of travel goods and reciprocal hospitality provided to the foreigners who came toIndia. We, thus, confirm the order of the AAC. 14. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.
-
1981 (11) TMI 83 - ITAT COCHIN
Net Wealth, Debt Owed ... ... ... ... ..... ties. This, however, requires to be verified as the departmental representative was not able to state before us that this claim of the assessee is to be taken as having been verified. We consider that the matter should go back to the AAC for the purpose of verifying the factual position, namely, whether the assessee has been keeping up the instalments and not defaulted in the instalments on the valuation dates. If the assessee has been keeping up these instalments without default, then the ratio of these decisions would clearly apply and the assessee would be entitled to the deduction as such deductions cannot be considered to be prohibited by section 2(m)(iii)(a). The AAC will verify this and allow the claim of the assessee if the factual position points to this. He will allow both the ITO and the assessee an opportunity in this regard so that the facts regarding the payment of the instalments without default can be properly verified. 13. The appeals are restored to the AAC.
-
1981 (11) TMI 82 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... action of the AAC is also fortified by the same High Court decision in a very lately reported case of Daljit Singh in which it was held that the Karta of an HUF had power to give gifts within reasonable limits out of love and affection. In the instant case, the gifts were reasonable. The gifts made by the assessee out of the HUF funds to the wives and children also, the facts are identical, the gift is within reasonable limits, the donee is not a stranger, the gift is of movable property, there is no co-relation between the of Rs. 5000 invested in the firm styled as M/s. Raghbir Singh and Co. by donee Kamaljit Kaur, and profit earned there from as a partner, we have to come to a conclusion that the income earned from the said firm is not carved directly or indirectly from the said amount of Rs. 5,000. The findings of the AAC on the basis of the above stated facts and in the light of our discussion deserves to be confirmed. 8. In the result, the Revenue s appeal is dismissed.
-
1981 (11) TMI 81 - ITAT CALCUTTA-E
... ...
... ... ..... e been made. This appears to be true as copies of some of the orders on rectification applications will show. However, this is no ground for not depositing the instalment of advance tax within time, unless the assessee filed revised estimate showing lesser advance tax to be pay able so that technically the default by the assessee is there. 4. In Hindustan Steel Ltd. vs. State of Orissa (1972) 83 ITR 26 (SC), it has been held that penalty may not be leviable for a mere technical or venial breach of law, merely because it is lawful to do so. The Penalty in the present case is in addition to the amount of interest payable otherwise and substantially the assessee has not been very much in arrears because it otherwise got some refunds. Taking all these facts into consideration. We are of the opinion that only a token penalty in the present case would serve the ends of justice. We accordingly reduce the same to Rs. 100 only. 5. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed as above.
-
1981 (11) TMI 80 - ITAT CALCUTTA-E
... ...
... ... ..... ation of the assessee was false. At the most, it can be said that the assessee has failed to substantiate his explanation regarding the source of investment. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the principles laid down by the Supreme Court, we are of opinion that it is not a fit case for imposition of a penalty under s. 271(1)(c). The decision of the Calcutta High Court in 130 ITR 602 relied on by the Deptl. Rep. is also not applicable in this case, because, we are of opinion that the addition sustained in the appeal by the AAC in this case cannot be said to be altogether justified. Hence, even though the order of the AAC has became final, we hold that the department has not been able to establish that the aforesaid additions were really justified and that the amounts represented the assessee s concealed income. We accordingly cancel the penalty imposed by the ITO for the asst. yrs. 1965-66 and 1966-67. 9. In the result, both the appeals are allowed.
-
1981 (11) TMI 79 - ITAT CALCUTTA-B
... ...
... ... ..... iable evidence in support of that. The ornaments have been recovered from the premises of a Transport Co. Some ornaments were no-doubt recovered from the residence of the assessee. The ornaments were all in the almirahs in which the wife of the assessee was having her clothes. Prima facie the ornaments belong to the ladies. The assessee s wife has been able to show that she is a substantial lady with good financial background. In such circumstances, it was necessary for the ITO to establish that the assessee was the owner of such ornaments. All that the ITO has been able to obtain in this case is to throw some suspicion. It is trite leaming to say that suspicion can never be substituted for proof. However strong the suspicion may be, it is not sufficient to sustain an addition. The order of the ITO drew certain presumptions in the shape of surmises. Such an order can hardly be sustained. 11. In the result, the order of the CIT (Appeals) is upheld and the appeal is dismissed.
-
1981 (11) TMI 78 - ITAT CALCUTTA-A
... ...
... ... ..... hat the doubt cast to the genuineness of the notice by the ld. Deptl. Rep. is thus unfounded. The assessment records which were produced for our inspection do not show any proceeding under s. 139(2). This is further verified by the fact that a notice under s. 148 was issued on 7th Mach,1975. Had there been any proceeding under s. 139(2), a notice under s. 148 could not have been issued. It has, therefore, to be held, at the time of the issue of the notice under s. 142(1) on 7th Feb.,1975, there was a return of income on the record. The question then arises as to whether said return was filed within time. Unfortunately, however, the return is no longer on the record of the file. The benefit of the doubt would, therefore, have to be given to the assessee and it would have to be held that the return was filed in time. We hold accordingly. The penalty that has been imposed under s. 271(1)(a) is thus not maintainable, and is accordingly hereby cancelled. 4. The appeal is allowed.
-
1981 (11) TMI 77 - ITAT CALCUTTA-A
... ...
... ... ..... er cent of Rs. 4,10,737 being Rs. 61,610 is disallowed 8. As regards the above reasoning, the CIT has observed that the interest paid is on unpaid purchase consideration and is not relatable to any deposit, hence provisions of s. 40A(8) of the Act did not apply. The CIT (A) vide paras 10 and 11 of the impugned order afforded relief to the assessee at Rs. 10,629 being 15 per cent of Rs. 70,864 which, according to him, was interest paid on unpaid purchase consideration for property which was purchase consideration for property which was purchased for business purposes. No material has been placed before us by the Revenue to controvert the facts as are contained in paras 10 and 11 of the impugned order of the CIT (A) and in that view of the matter we find ourselves in full agreement with the reasonings and conclusion contained therein, with the result that on this score also we so uphold the impugned order. 9. In the result, the appeal by the Revenue fails and stands dismissed.
-
1981 (11) TMI 76 - ITAT BOMBAY-E
... ...
... ... ..... s the difference between the sale price and market price on the date of conversion, and the ITO acted otherwise in the computing the same. Therefore, we held that the computation of the Income-tax Officer of such profits is erroneous in law. Since the assessee s Valuer has shown its value on 1st Oct., 1973 at Rs. 3,84,900 and the AAC accepted it for the computation of profits on following the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid case, and being so, we hold that the AAC was justified in arriving at his conclusion, and thereby sustaining the addition of Rs. 48,020 in place of Rs. 1,06,506 made by the ITO, in respect of the Galas sold by the assessee to M/s. V.V. Shah. We confirm his order in view of our above discussion and lesson thereof. 11. Since we have confirmed the order of the AAC, and being so, both the appeals of the revenue and the assessee are liable to be dismissed. 12. In the result, both the appeals of the revenue and the assessee are dismissed.
|
