|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 141 to 160 of 292 Records
-
1992 (1) TMI 155 - ITAT DELHI-A
Assessment Order, Cost Of Acquisition ... ... ... ... ..... are. Same is the position in the case of HUF. There is thus no difference in regard to this part of the legal position. So just as on partition a member gets a property for a particular value, that value becomes his cost, in the same way if a partner gets a property at a particular value on dissolution of the firm that value becomes his cost. Therefore, there is no scope to ignore the cost shown in the books of account at the time of dissolution of partnership. In view of our above discussion, we are of the opinion that provisions of section 49(1)(iii)(b) are not applicable to the facts of the present case. Therefore, the cost of acquisition shall be the cost shown in the books of account, unless contrary is proved by the department. We therefore, agree with the finding given by the CIT (Appeals) on this point and do not find any substance in the departmental ground of appeal. This ground is rejected. 6. to 12. These paras are not reproduced here as they involve minor issues.
-
1992 (1) TMI 154 - ITAT DELHI
Business Expenditure, Interpretation OF STATUTES, Res Judicata ... ... ... ... ..... inion, in the manner indicated above. 9. For these reasons having regard to the past accepted practice, which was found to be genuine and for the further reason that there was ample evidence to show that Dr. B.N. Wahi was over all in charge of the business and taking active part in the business and having regard to the fact that he was also having a general power of attorney on behalf of the assessee and having regard to the further fact that the absence of agreement to pay commission was not considered by both the members as a point against the assessee, I am of the opinion that on the facts and circumstances of the case and having regard to the totality of the circumstances I agree with the view expressed by the learned Vice-President, the Accountant Member and hold that there was no justification for the disallowance of the commission paid to Dr. B.N. Wahi and Shri Diwakar Wahi. 10. The matter will now go before the regular Bench for decision according to majority opinion.
-
1992 (1) TMI 153 - ITAT CUTTACK
... ...
... ... ..... r interpreting the provision of law as held by the Supreme Court in the case of K.P. Varghese but yet the speech made by the Finance Minister who moved the bill explaining the reasons for its introduction can certainly be referred to for the purpose of ascertaining the object and purpose of introduction of a particular provision in a statute. Therefore, in our considered opinion the income derived by the assessee society and declared in the return filed cannot be deemed or considered as income earned by the members themselves through their labour and, therefore, cannot rank or qualify for exemption under the provisions of s. 80P(2)(a)(vi). We are also in agreement with the findings and observation of the Division Bench of this Tribunal given in order dt. 23rd Oct., 1981 in assessee s own appeals for asst. yrs. 1974-75 to 1978-79. We, therefore, agree with the reasoning given by the CIT(A) in the impugned order and confirm his order. 5. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.
-
1992 (1) TMI 152 - ITAT CUTTACK
Co-operative Society ... ... ... ... ..... eting the provision of law as held by the Supreme Court in the case of K. P. Varghese but yet the speech made by the Finance Minister who moved the bill explaining the reasons for its introduction can certainly be referred to for the purpose of ascertaining the object and purpose of introduction of a particular provision in a statute. Therefore, in our considered opinion the income derived by the assessee-society and declared in the return filed cannot be deemed or considered as income earned by the members themselves through their labour and, therefore, cannot rank or qualify for exemption under the provisions of section 80P(2)(a)(vi). We are also in agreement with the findings and observation of the Division Bench of this Tribunal given in Order dated 23--10--1981 in assessee s own appeals for assessment years 1974-75 to 1978-79. We, therefore, agree with the reasoning given by the CIT(A) in the impugned order and confirm his order. 5. In the result, the appeal is dismissed
-
1992 (1) TMI 151 - ITAT COCHIN
... ...
... ... ..... ugned assessment year, s. 161(1) will apply and tax has to be levied and recovered from the trustees in like manner and to the same extent as it would be leviable upon and recoverable from the person represented by him. We upheld the reasoning of the CIT(A) in so far as the validity and the genuineness of the trust is concerned. Already the ITO has levied the taxes in the hands of the beneficiaries individually. Therefore, even as a protective assessment this assessment cannot be sustained. Realising the inconsistent stand of the ITO, the learned departmental representative was unable to support the order of the ITO. In the light of the assessment having been made in the hands of the beneficiaries for which evidence is produced before us, we set aside the assessment itself as having become infructuous. As a result, Revenue s appeal is dismissed. The cross objection of the assessee to the extent to which it challenged the status of the AOP is allowed for statistical purposes.
-
1992 (1) TMI 150 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
Agricultural Land, Capital Asset, Capital Gains, Cost Of Acquisition ... ... ... ... ..... on--cost of acquisition has to be taken as on 1-4-1970, the ground becomes redundant. 11. Ground No. 6 shall be deemed to have been allowed for we have directed the cost of acquisition to be taken as on 1-4-1970. 12. As to ground No. 7, we will direct that taking into account the prolong litigation in the acquisition proceedings between the assessee and the State and in view of the ratio of the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in Mr. Khorshed Shapoor Chenai s case referred to above, the assessee shall be allowed a claim/deduction out of enhanced compensation in lieu of litigation, hazard of litigation and other expenditure incurred and for this purpose, assessee shall be heard and decision of the Hon ble High Courts/ITAT on the issue, if available, shall be taken into account. This is to be allowed under section 48(1)(a)(i) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 13. In the ultimate analysis, the assessee s ITA No. 1187/Chandi./89 succeeds partly on merits and partly for statistics
-
1992 (1) TMI 149 - ITAT CALCUTTA-E
Assessee's Appeal ... ... ... ... ..... most can be held to be an irregularity, curable by any Tribunal at its own instance and not a serious illegality affecting the rights of the parties or affecting the jurisdiction of the Tribunal thereby tending to defeat the ends of justice which are otherwise available to the concerned parties. Our view has also the support of the decision of the Calcutta High Court in the case of Sheonath Singh v. CIT 1958 33 ITR 591 and also from the decision of the Patna High Court in the case of Gouri Kumari Devi v. CIT 1959 37 ITR 220 and of Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. ITAT 1987 167 ITR 250, wherein those courts have dealt similar controversies about signing of appeal papers. 7. We, therefore direct the CIT(A) to take the appeals on record and direct the appellant company to cure the defect by filing fresh Form No. 35 duly signed by any present director of the appellant company and then to hear and dispose of the appeals on merits. 8. In the result, the appeals are allowed.
-
1992 (1) TMI 148 - ITAT CALCUTTA-D
Advance Tax, Amnesty Scheme, Assessed Tax, Carry Forward, Excise Duty, High Court, Interest Payable By Assessee, Previous Year, Revised Return, Words And Phrases
-
1992 (1) TMI 147 - ITAT CALCUTTA-A
... ...
... ... ..... der mould and then cut accordingly to make holes for seat fixing, gear selector, hand-break, foot paddels, steering column, etc. The edges of the carpet sets are bound with cotton/woollen/synthetic yarn wherever required. Latex is applied on the edges of the carpet so that the loops may not come out and then carpet is trimmed properly. In view of this process the appellant is entitled for the s. 80-I deduction and the CIT(A) s order should be upheld. 7. We have considered the submissions of both the parties and are inclined to agree with the learned authorised representative s submissions. The assessee-company has been registered as a small scale industrial undertaking and the processes has mentioned above clearly go to show that the assessee manufactures by different processes. In view of these facts, we agree with the CIT(A) that the assessee is entitled for s, 80-I deduction and, accordingly, we uphold the findings of the CIT(A). 8. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.
-
1992 (1) TMI 146 - ITAT CALCUTTA-A
High Court, Income From Business, Interest On Excess Collection, Mercantile System, Sugar Manufacturing Company, Supreme Court, Writ Petition
-
1992 (1) TMI 145 - ITAT BOMBAY-A
Foreign Enterprise ... ... ... ... ..... nion, the rationale of the Supreme Court decision in Distributors (Baroda) (P.) Ltd. s case reproduced above is more relevant and appropriate to the facts of the present case. 7.3 The last limb of Shri Dastur s argument was that the CIT (Appeals) had erred in not taking into account the dividend income on the ground that deduction under section 80M was available in respect of such income. Here, we agree that the entire dividend income cannot be excluded from the total receipts. Only the dividend from Indian companies, in respect of which 80M relief was available to the assessee, can be excluded but the same ratio cannot apply to foreign dividends which, according to the counsel, amounted to Rs. 3,83,000. We direct that in computing the total receipts such foreign dividend should be taken into consideration. In the result, the first ground will be treated as partly allowed to the extent indicated above. 8 to 16. These paras are not reproduced here as they involve minor issues.
-
1992 (1) TMI 144 - ITAT BOMBAY
Assessing Officer, Rule 1BB, Valuation Officer, Valuer's Report ... ... ... ... ..... lso direct him to do what he had failed to do. It was also held by the Supreme Court in CIT v. Kanpur Coal Syndicate 1964 53 ITR 225 that an appellate authority can direct the tax officer where he has an option to assess, in what manner such option should be exercised. The powers of the appellate authority are wide to do justice to the assessee and also to protect the interest of the revenue. He may remand the case to the Income-tax Officer to do afresh. The appellate authority has jurisdiction as well as the duty to correct all errors in the proceedings. He has to issue, if necessary, appropriate directions to the authority against whose decision the appeal is preferred to dispose of the whole or any part of the matter afresh, unless forbidden from doing so by statute--Kapurchand Shrimal v. CIT 1981 131 ITR 451 (SC). In our view, the order of the Commissioner of Wealth-tax (Appeals) does not require any interference. We confirm the same. 7. In the result, appeal is dismissed
-
1992 (1) TMI 143 - ITAT BANGALORE
... ...
... ... ..... had been first issued. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of this case and particularly in view of the fact that the original file of the ITO does not contain the reasons of his belief to proceed under s. 147(a), we are of the view that this issue must be restored to the file of the ITO for a proper verification of all facts. Further, on merits too, the assessment requires to be redone since the assessee has taken up a contention that the Assessing Officer has not taken into consideration the amounts returned by the debtors. In the circumstances, we, while setting side the impugned assessment restore the entire issue to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction that he shall reconsider the entire matter including the question of limitation and the assessee shall be given an opportunity of being heard. With these directions, we restore the matter to the file of the Asst. Commissioner(Inv.) 14. The appeal shall be treated as allowed for statistical purposes.
-
1992 (1) TMI 142 - ITAT ALLAHABAD-B
Capital Gains, Sale Proceeds ... ... ... ... ..... 5 are, therefore, decided accordingly and the ITO is directed to compute the capital gain on the amount of Rs. 45,000 after allowing the usual deductions permissible under section 80T according to law. 10. Ground No. 60 is regarding the applicability of section 54E. The said section has no applicability as the assessee has nowhere deposited the alleged amount as the same is available only to the person who deposits the sale proceeds/capital gains in the bank or other specified institution. The said issue is, therefore, decided against the assessee. 11. Ground Nos. 7, 8 and 9 are general and they do not need any comment. 12. Ground No. 10 is regarding the addition of Rs. 5,200 as unexplained cash. The said ground has not been seriously argued out. Moreover, this does not arise out of the order of the learned CIT(A). We, therefore, decide the issue against the assessee. 13. Ground No. 11 is general and does not need much comment. 14. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed
-
1992 (1) TMI 141 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-C
... ...
... ... ..... by the Department that for the purpose of giving relief under s. 45(D). The business which was being previously carried on not only in India but even in foreign countries seems quite absurd. If that was the intention of the legislature it was not necessary for the legislature to qualify the industrial undertaking with the word in India . 16. Coming to ground No. 3, it has been observed in the assessment order that the assessee-trust is not entitled to exemption under s. 5(i)(xxiii) because the assessee is neither individual nor an HUF. However, a plain reading of ss. 21(1) and 21(4) clearly indicate that trustees should be assessed in the like manner and to the same extent as the beneficiaries. Since in the present case the beneficiaries are individuals, assessee is entitled for exemption under s. 5(1)(xxiii) of the WT Act treating the status as individual. Therefore, we do not find any justification with the order of the Dy. CIT(A). 17. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed.
-
1992 (1) TMI 140 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-C
... ...
... ... ..... ion , business of manufacture , business of production of any article or thing not specified in the XI Schedule. It cannot be denied that the assessee is carrying on the business of construction, an integrated and complicated business in a systematic manner. The dumpers are admittedly used in the said business of construction. The water tank is also meant for meeting the requirement of water for the said construction business. Such provisions should be construed in a liberal, wide and practical sense. Such view is fully fortified by the judgment of Hon ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT vs. Bhagiratha Engg. Ltd. (1991) 99 CTR (Ker) 204. 8. In view of the aforesaid discussions were are of the view that the original assessment order made by the ITO cannot be regarded as erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of Revenue. The order passed by the learned CIT under s. 263 is, therefore, set aside and that of the ITO is restored. 9. In the result, the appeals are allowed.
-
1992 (1) TMI 139 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-B
... ...
... ... ..... 28A) of the Act. This is a connected point and a decision in relation to this ground can be taken only after the assessee s claim for grant of the said expenditure as a revenue expenditure is decided by the assessing authority in accordance with the directions given by the Tribunal. In case the expenditure in question is allowed as revenue expenditure, depreciation and investment allowance granted by the CIT(A) in relation to this ground will be withdrawn. In case the expenditure is held to be a capital expenditure, the order of the CIT(A) allowing depreciation and investment allowance will be perfectly justified. This matter is also, therefore, restored back to the ITO to decide the same afresh in the light of aforesaid observations and in the light of directions given by the Tribunal in the case of assessee s appeal vide order dt. 23rd Feb., 1989. 14. In the result, assessee s appeal is allowed and the Revenue s appeal is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes.
-
1992 (1) TMI 138 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-B
Discretionary Trust, Orders Prejudicial To Interests ... ... ... ... ..... ch moneys. 17. Our finding in respect of the income receivable for the benefit of Oral Discretionary Trusts mentioned in First Schedule is that the ultimate beneficiaries are known but their shares are indeterminate. As regards the Oral Specific Trust at Sr. No. 19, our finding is that the income is received for the benefit of the beneficiaries of the said trust. As regards the income receivable for the benefit of the trusts mentioned in Schedule II is concerned, our finding is that the real beneficiaries had no right, title or interest either vested or contingent to the income in question in the years under consideration in view of specific provisions in the trust deed. However, it is not our finding that there are no beneficiaries in respect of any part of the income. Consequently, the reason given by the CIT for disallowing interest cannot be sustained. We accordingly set aside the direction of the CIT to the ITO for disallowing interest. 18. The appeals are partly allowed
-
1992 (1) TMI 137 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-B
Amnesty Scheme, Income From Undisclosed Sources, Penalty For Concealment, Penalty Proceedings
-
1992 (1) TMI 136 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-B
Deduction Of Interest, High Court, Interest Liability, Interest On Arrears, Mercantile System, Previous Year, Purchase Price, Supreme Court
............
|
