|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 81 to 100 of 150 Records
-
1992 (6) TMI 75 - ITAT MADRAS-A
Business Connection, High Court ... ... ... ... ..... year relevant to the previous year in which the date 31-10-1991 falls. To keep the records straight, we may add that while making the assessment for the said assessment year, the Assessing Officer will proceed on the footing that the liability had arisen in the previous year relevant to that assessment year. He is of course free to examine on merits the question whether the assessee is entitled to revenue deduction in respect of its share of the damages as quantified on compromise basis. 20. In the result, subject to the foregoing observations, the assessee s appeal is dismissed. 21. This brings us on to the two appeals filed, one by each of the two partners of the firm. These appeals will have to be dismissed for two reasons. First, under the scheme of the Act, the partner is not entitled to prefer an appeal on matters relating to the assessment of the firm. Secondly, we have dismissed the appeal filed by the firm. We, therefore, dismiss the two appeals filed by the partners
-
1992 (6) TMI 73 - ITAT JAIPUR
Assessing Officer, Mistake Apparent From Record, Purchase Price, Words And Phrases ... ... ... ... ..... n 143(1) is not correct in law and is required to be vacated. We hold accordingly and direct that the addition of Rs. 1,05,39,059 made by the DC (Asst.) by way of making adjustments be cancelled. 18. In the result, the appeal is allowed. 19. We, however, make it clear that nothing expressed herein shall be read as expression of the final opinion of the Tribunal on the merits of any point involved in the assessment in this case and which is, reportedly, in the process of being made consequent to action by Assessing Officer under section 143(2) of the Act. In the regular assessment proceedings the Assessing Officer, after giving the assessee a proper opportunity of explaining its case and adducing evidence in this regard, shall be free to frame the assessment order and determine assessee s income and tax, interest etc. payable thereon according to law and the assessee shall also be at liberty to challenge that order according to law by way of appeal or revision as it may choose
-
1992 (6) TMI 72 - ITAT HYDERABAD-B
... ...
... ... ..... CTR (Raj) 194 (1988) 173 ITR 407 (Raj). In fact in CIT vs. A.P. Parukutty Moppilamma and Ors., it is held that description of status by the assessee in its return is not convincing. This decision in our opinion, helps the Department more than the assessee. In CIT vs. Suresh Chandra Gupta, it is ruled by the Rajasthan High Court that when the assessee filed a return claiming the status of HUF assessment should not be made in the status of an individual without giving any notice or indication that his claim for assessment in the status of HUF was not going to be accepted. However, in the facts of this case, it is the assessee who had claimed the status of HUF. The ITO accepted the status as that of HUF. The CIT who passed the revisionary order also accepted the status as HUF and therefore the decision of the Rajasthan High Court does not apply to the facts of the case. 9. For all the above reasons, we hold that the appeal of the assessee has no merits and hence it is dismissed.
-
1992 (6) TMI 71 - ITAT HYDERABAD-B
Original Assessment, Revised Return ... ... ... ... ..... and Refrigeration (P.) Ltd. 1976 103 ITR 455 (Delhi), (ii) Addl. CIT v. Hindustan Cold Storage and Refrigeration 1983 15 Taxman 448 (Delhi), (iii) Addl. CIT v. Mercury General Corpn. (P.) Ltd. 1982 133 ITR 525 (Delhi), and (iv) CIT v. Tamil Nadu Agro Industries Corpn. Ltd. 1987 163 1TR 61 (Mad.). We are of the view that the above represents the correct position of law and in view of the categorical decision cited above, we reject the contention that the scope of section 10(2)(vi) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 is wider than the scope of section 32(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. In view of our discussion, we are of the opinion that the arguments advanced by the learned Counsel for the assessee have no force and therefore all of them are to be rejected. We also hold that the assessees herein were only fractional owners who were not entitled to depreciation on the basis of their fractional ownership in the assets commonly held with others. 7. In the result, the appeals are allowed
-
1992 (6) TMI 70 - ITAT HYDERABAD-B
Original Assessment, Revised Return ... ... ... ... ..... ooppilamma s case, (4) Suresh Chandra Gupta s case. In fact in A.P. Parukutty Moppilamma s case, it is held that description of status by the assessee in its return is not convincing. This decision in our opinion, helps the department more than the assessee. In Suresh Chandra Gupta s case, it is ruled by the Rajasthan High Court that when the assessee filed a return claiming the status of HUF assessment should not be made in the status of an individual without giving any notice or indication that his claim for assessment in the status of HUF was not going to be accepted. However, in the facts of this case. it is the assessee who had claimed the status of HUF. The ITO accepted the status as that of HUF. The CIT who passed the revisionary order also accepted the status as HUF and therefore the decision of the Rajasthan High Court does not apply to the facts of the case. 9. For all the above reasons, we hold that the appeal of the assessee has no merits and hence it is dismissed
-
1992 (6) TMI 69 - ITAT HYDERABAD-B
Annual Value, Applied To, Income From House Property, Income From Property, Income Tax Act, Let Out, Mistake Apparent From Record
-
1992 (6) TMI 68 - ITAT HYDERABAD-A
Accounting Year, Previous Year, Transport Business ... ... ... ... ..... 3,01,030 as telephone expenses, the expenditure relating to the telephone installed at the residence of the partner is only Rs. 14,249 out of which a sum of Rs. 10,000 has been disallowed. It may also be mentioned that the disallowance has been made by the Assessing Officer and sustained by the CIT (Appeals) on the presumption that the partner must have used the telephone for his personal purpose also. We are, however, of the view that the branches of the assessee are spread over different cities and towns and, therefore, the partner was required to contact the branches for the purpose of business. The reason for this our conclusion is that compared to the total expenditure of more than Rs. 3 lakhs on telephone, the expenses on this telephone of Rs. 14,249 are very reasonable and, therefore, we do not find any justification for the disallowance. We, therefore, direct the Revenue to exclude the sum of Rs. 10,000 from the total income of the appellant. 20. The appeal is allowed
-
1992 (6) TMI 67 - ITAT HYDERABAD-A
Accounting Year, Sales Tax, Trading Receipt, Written Down Value ... ... ... ... ..... erefore, after due verification and ascertaining what exactly is the amount representing the last month s collections, and how much out of those collections was paid to the Karnataka State towards sales tax, Central sales tax etc. within the time allowed under the Statute, after the close of the accounting year such amount out of the last month s collections out of the total impugned amount of Rs. 1,15,555 which was found to have been paid should be allowed as deduction while computing the income of the assessee for assessment year 1984-85. 18. We have already held that the brought forward amount of Rs. 36,683.53 should not be disallowed under section 43B since it did not represent the collections made in the accounting year in question. Therefore, in the result, the appeal is partly allowed and with regard to the sum representing the last month s collections which was said to have been paid within the time allowed under the law, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes
-
1992 (6) TMI 66 - ITAT DELHI-E
Factory Building, Valuation Officer, Valuation Report ... ... ... ... ..... ur years before that, Keeping in view the rate of inflation in mind, there is scope of reduction of 40 per cent if he wants to arrive at the estimated value as on September 1982. Therefore, we agree with the finding of the CIT (Appeals) that the value of the DVO in the revised report at Rs. 8,37,000 should be further reduced by 40 per cent. So taking into consideration this aspect of the matter also, there is hardly any difference in the value of cost of construction shown by the assessee and that arrived at by the DVO after giving reduction. Therefore, we are of the opinion that from this angle also no addition is called for. In view of this, we are of the opinion that the value declared by the assessee for cost of construction of factory building is reasonable and there is no scope for making addition on account of unexplained investment from the point of view discussed above. We therefore, dismiss the departmental appeal and allow the assessee s cross-objection accordingly
-
1992 (6) TMI 65 - ITAT DELHI-E
Assessing Officer, Market Value, Reference To Valuation Officer ... ... ... ... ..... ndment it is clear that reasonable cause has been inserted by the legislature with an intent to give relief in a case where there was a real hardship. In the present case the assessees have mentioned that due to the wrong advice of the counsel, the default in payment has been committed. The wrong advice of the counsel is a reasonable cause as it has been held in the case of Lachman Chaturbhuj Java and Ramniklal D. Mehta Therefore, the CIT (Appeals) has rightly held that there was a reasonable cause for making late payment. Therefore, keeping in view the reasonable cause of the assessees and the various decisions of the Supreme Court and the other High Courts cited above that the payment made within the financial year should be treated within the statutory limit we are of the opinion that the CIT (Appeals) has taken a correct view in the matter. No interference is called for. We agree with the findings given by the CIT (Appeals). 7. In the result, all the appeals are dismissed
-
1992 (6) TMI 64 - ITAT DELHI-D
... ...
... ... ..... d, we think it is fair and proper in the circumstances of the case to remit the case back to the Dy. CIT(Asst.) and direct him to allow the assessee an opportunity to adduce evidence about the expenditure incurred or likely to be incurred for deduction from the gross income and then to apply the rate of 65 only to such net income as arrived at. This process is permissible under s. 195 and can be enforced through an application under s. 154, if there was failure, to do so. No debate is involved to arrive at the answer that it is the net income on which the rate of tax is to be applied although several points were raised to contest this proposition of law which is patent and clear from the provisions of s. 195(2) of the IT Act. 8. In the result, we direct the Dy. CIT(Asst.) to modify the assessments accordingly and in the light of our earlier observations, we are not going into the question as to the nature of the gross income. 9. In the result, the appeals are allowed in part.
-
1992 (6) TMI 63 - ITAT DELHI-C
Assessing Officer, Mistake Apparent From Record, Purchase Price, Words And Phrases ... ... ... ... ..... l mentioned that the ITO Ward 4(4) had no jurisdiction to record such statement. The department could not bring anything to show against it. Therefore, on this reason, the statement referred, has no value to conclude that the payment was in relation to services rendered. 13. The facts and circumstances, evidence and preponderance of probabilities show that S/Shri K.P. Gupta and M.P. Gupta gave this amount as a gift in appreciation of personal qualities. abilities and the personal help rendered for receiving enhanced compensation and other court matters out of long association with assessee-family and may be for love and affection besides the close relationship with the employers. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the amount received by the assessee is a gift, it cannot be treated as income of the assessee from other sources. We, therefore, set aside the order of the CIT (Appeals) and direct the assessing officer to delete the same. 14. In the result, the appeal is allowed
-
1992 (6) TMI 62 - ITAT DELHI-C
Advance Tax, Assessing Officer, Failure To File, Surtax Liability, Tax Liability ... ... ... ... ..... uld have been liable for penalty under section 9A(1)(b) of the Act. No such penalty has been levied in this case which impliedly means that the revenue concedes that there was no obligation on the assessee to furnish a statement of advance surtax payable by it in accordance with the provisions of clause (a) of sub-section (5) of section 7A. 11. For the above reasons we hold that no interest under section 7D of the Act was leviable in this case. As a result the revenue s appeal is dismissed and the assessee s appeal is allowed. The levy of interest is hereby cancelled in toto. 12. As regards cross objection filed by the assessee this was totally superfluous. The assessee had already filed its appeal on27-1-1989challenging the retention of levy of interest. Therefore, there was no need for cross objection and in our view when the assessee filed an appeal a subsequent cross objection for the same purpose is not maintainable. The assessee s cross objection is accordingly rejected
-
1992 (6) TMI 61 - ITAT DELHI-B
... ...
... ... ..... ealment of income. To reiterate the order of the Tribunal confirming the addition is only good evidence and very relevant evidence but not conclusive evidence. Those facts can be reappraised and even additional evidence can be taken in penalty proceedings to come to a conclusion whether the assessee had concealed the particulars of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. This is now a settled law of the land. On a consideration of the above, we are of the opinion that concealment of income in this case is not proved and the addition confirmed by the Tribunal is good only for assessment purposes and is not good for drawing a conclusion that it represented the concealed income of the assessee, particularly when adverse inferences were drawn on the basis of discrepancies found in the subsidiary records ignoring the explanations offered by the assessee and that too without the aid of the books of accounts maintained by the assessee. We, therefore, allow the appeal.
-
1992 (6) TMI 60 - ITAT DELHI-B
Central Government, Orders Prejudicial To Interests, Previous Year, Tax At Source ... ... ... ... ..... one he had proposed in his notice to the assessee. As per section 263 of the Act, the Commissioner is empowered to call for and examine the records, and if he considers that, the order so passed by the assessing officer is erroneous resulting in prejudice being caused to the revenue, he may, after giving the assessee, the opportunity of being heard, pass such orders thereon as the circumstances may justify. Since, the CIT is required to provide the assessee an opportunity of being heard before passing his order thereon, it is implied that, the Commissioner is only empowered to pass an order on the basis of his initiation. Since, in the instant case, the CIT having initiated the proceedings on a particular basis and concluded not on that basis, but on a totally different ground, his order suffers from the fundamental infirmity and lack of sanction of the Act, and has necessarily needs to be quashed. We accordingly set aside his order even from the point of view of jurisdiction
-
1992 (6) TMI 59 - ITAT COCHIN
... ...
... ... ..... le under s. 25FF is deductible as revenue expenditure under s. 10(2)(xv) from the profits of the concern. We are not concerned with such an issue in the case before us. The issue is about computation of capital gains. In accordance with the agreement, the condition precedent for the transfer was that the assessee had to stop the business and terminate the employees, pay retrenchment compensation and other benefits to its employees. Hence, we hold that the expenditure is incurred in connection with the transfer of the asset. Hence, this decision has no application to the facts of the case on hand. 11. In view of the above, we hold that the CIT is not justified in setting aside the assessment in respect of the deduction granted on account of retrenchment compensation of Rs. 1,22,900 paid to the employees in terms of the agreement to sell the cinema theatre. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the CIT and restore the order of the AO. 12. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1992 (6) TMI 58 - ITAT COCHIN
... ...
... ... ..... arat High Court that the production of articles for use from raw or prepared materials by giving such materials new forms, qualities, properties or combinations whether by hand labour or machine, would be manufacture. In the case of CIT vs. N.C. Budharaja and Co. (1980) 121 ITR 212 (Ori) their Lordships of the Orissa High Court has held that all manufacturing activities are industrial activities but all industrial activities do not necessarily involve manufacture. If the above two decisions are considered in the context of the production of rubber sheet by the assessee after a long process, the activity of the assessee would fall within the ambit of industrial undertaking engaged in the business of production or manufacture of an article or thing. In the result, we are of the opinion that the appeal by the Department on this ground is without merit and the same is rejected. 9. In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed and the appeal by the Department is dismissed.
-
1992 (6) TMI 56 - ITAT COCHIN
High Court, Initial Compensation, Land Acquisition, Question Of Fact, Question Of Law, Right To Receive Compensation
-
1992 (6) TMI 55 - ITAT COCHIN
Interest Income, Interest On Advance, Mercantile System ... ... ... ... ..... ery same vouchers evidencing the expenditure and has chosen to disallow the same. This would amount to change of opinion on the same set of facts, which the Income-tax Officer is not permitted to have in the reassessment. 18. Shri Abraham, on the other hand, contended that once the assessment is validly reopened, there are no fetters on the ITO to have a second look at the entire assessment. 19. We uphold the contention of the learned Sr. Departmental Representative. In the ratio of the decision of the Kerala High Court in K. Kesava Reddiar s case, it has been held that when the assessment is validly reopened, the entire assessment is at large and the assessing authority is bound to determine the income de novo. However, in this case as we have held that the reassessment is bad in law, we do not go into the merits of the disallowances made by the assessing authority in the reassessment, as it would be a futile exercise. 20. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed
-
1992 (6) TMI 54 - ITAT CALCUTTA-E
Closing Stock, Excise Duty, Raw Material ... ... ... ... ..... Dr. Pal based on the proviso to section 32AB(4) that the assessee being a company subject to audit under the Companies Act is not bound by the requirement under the main provision that the audit certificate should be filed along with the return of income. 24. In ground No. 25 the assessee questions the disallowance of Rs. 84,594 under Rule 6B on account of expenses incurred on gifts and presentation articles. We, however, find that the CIT (Appeals) has held that even in the audit report filed along with the return of income the amount to be disallowed has been stated as Rs. 82,687 and that the CIT (Appeals) has confirmed this amount and deleted the balance of Rs. 1907. Since the tax audit report itself shows that the amount to be disallowed under Rule 6B is Rs. 62,687, we see no reason to interfere. The disallowance of Rs. 82,687 is confirmed. 25. Ground No. 26 is a general ground and does not call for any decision. 26. In the result, the assessee s appeal is partly allowed
|
