|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 141 to 160 of 242 Records
-
1993 (4) TMI 106 - ITAT DELHI-A
... ...
... ... ..... an exporter. As against a large stock inventory aggregating Rs. 28 lakhs and odd, we find no appreciable reasons or motive on the part of the assessee to wilfully under value the aforesaid three items and a proper appreciation of facts reveals the position that there was no deliberate motive on the part of the assessee and whatever has happened is entirely due to a bona fide impression about the quantity and the valuation thereof. This by no stretch of imagination can attract the penal provisions and no undue importance can be given to the withdrawal of the relevant ground before the Tribunal since the assessee s counsel was able to show that the said withdrawal came about as a result of obtaining necessary relief in the subsequent assessment year at the hands of the CIT(A) and that being much prior to the hearing of the appeal before the Tribunal. In the final analysis, we cancel the penalty of Rs. 54,686 imposed on the assessee under s. 271(1)(c). 11. The appeal is allowed.
-
1993 (4) TMI 105 - ITAT DELHI-A
... ...
... ... ..... ilable with the assessee as on 5th Dec., 1988, 6th Dec., 1988 and 7th Dec., 1988 out of which the assessee had shown payment of Rs. 50,000 in cash to Shri Neeraj Malhotra on 8th Dec., 1988, the day when he was accosted. The Department has disbelieved the books of account and the entries on the basis that there is a manipulation. In our view mere scrapping of zeros, against entries of Shri Krishan Lal and Shri Shadi Lal will not necessarily give a presumption that it was made with a view to make an entry of Rs. 50,000 in the name of Shri Neeraj Malhotra. Possibility of genuine mistake cannot be ruled out. In view of the circumstances when no excess cash was found and the amount was released being that of the assessee by the Court, we are of the opinion that the explanation given by the assessee with regard to possession of Rs. 50,000 is satisfactory. We, therefore, set aside the order of the CIT(A) on this score also. 11. In view of our above discussion, the appeal is allowed.
-
1993 (4) TMI 104 - ITAT COCHIN
... ...
... ... ..... lation of interest at 24 on the amount held to be advances given by the appellant in the assessment year under consideration as well as any earlier loan given by the appellant . With these remarks he deleted the addition of Rs. 1,32,731 being the aggregate interest on accrual basis. 13. We do not find any infirmity in the order of the CIT(A). He has only directed the ITO to verify whether the assessee has reported the interest on receipt basis in the subsequent years on receipt of such interest from A. Moosa and K.K. Basheer, and if so, he observed that there was no justification for including the same in the impugned assessment on accrual basis if not, its inclusion was justified. Thus, the issue is left open and stands restored to the ITO by the CIT(A). The direction of the CIT(A) is fair and reasonable in the context of the contention of the assessee. We decline to interfere. 14. In the result, the Revenue s appeal is dismissed and the assessee s appeal is partly allowed.
-
1993 (4) TMI 103 - ITAT COCHIN
... ...
... ... ..... ted that this item of expenditure would fall under s. 35D(2)(a)(ii). In this case the report was submitted by KITCO. For purposes of the allowance of expenditure under this section the report should be by a concern which is approved by the CBDT. The appellant s learned counsel has not produced any evidence before me to state that KITCO is approved by the CBDT. 10. Having regard to rival submissions, we do not find any justification to take different view. If the assessee has not produced materials even before the appellate authority that KITCO is an approved institution, its arguments remain only as bare assertions nor has it been shown that the project report has resulted in the creation of an asset. In the absence of both, the only thing that the appellate authority could do is to confirm the disallowance. The CIT(A) is right in doing so and we uphold his action. 11. In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed.
-
1993 (4) TMI 102 - ITAT COCHIN
Advertisement, Publicity And Sales Promotion ... ... ... ... ..... ion 37(3A) of the Act. In any jewellery shop usual practice is to give ornaments or jewellery purchased by the customer in the boxes in which they were kept in the show-room. The boxes are necessary to preserve and protect the shape and the size of the ornaments or jewellery as for example in the case of a necklace or Navaratnamala or Casumala. These cannot be given away without putting them in the proper boxes or containers. As a matter of fact they are given only after the sales are effected to enable the customer to carry home the articles. Thus, the impugned expenditure is in the nature of distribution expenditure, rather than advertisement publicity and sales promotion. Distribution takes place after the sales. Therefore, the provisions of section 37(3A) cannot be invoked. Thus, we set aside the order of the CIT(A) on this point. 4. The other points raised in this appeal are not pressed at the time of hearing of the appeal. 5. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part
-
1993 (4) TMI 101 - ITAT COCHIN
Arbitration Award, Succession Of Firm ... ... ... ... ..... is not whether the firm should be assessed after its dissolution in respect of any income accrued or received during the existence of the firm. Therefore, the ratio laid down in Paulson s case. cited supra, will not apply to the facts of this case. 6. The revenue relies on section 176(3A) of the Act, which came into force with effect from 1-4-1976. Section 176 applies to the case of discontinued business and it cannot apply to a succession to the firm. In the case of succession the business does not cease to exist, but only there is a change of ownership as has been laid down in CIT v. P.E. Polson 1945 13 ITR 384 (PC), O.Rm.M.Sp.S.V. Meyyappa Chettiar v. CIT 1943 11 ITR 247 (Mad.) and also C.J. Sheth v. CIT 1962 46 ITR 1052 (Mad.). Therefore, the inclusion of arbitration amount in the assessment of the firm under section 176(3A) of the Act is deleted. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee succeeds. 7 to 10. (These paras are not reproduced here as they involve minor issues.
-
1993 (4) TMI 100 - ITAT COCHIN
Law Applicable, Levy Of Penalty, Loans Or Deposits, Penal Provisions, Penalty Provisions ... ... ... ... ..... med as deposits or loans as understood in common parlance. It only represents diversion of funds from one concern to another depending upon the exigencies of the business. Further, the transactions have not been impeached as non-genuine or bogus. Hence the provisions of sections 269SS and 269T are not attracted to the facts of the case. Even if they were to apply, in the facts and circumstances explained above, the action of the assessee firm in accepting the funds in cash or making refunds of such funds in cash can be ascribed to its bona fide belief that it would not attract the provisions of sections 269SS or 269T given the nature of the transactions and the circumstances of its case. Bona fide belief coupled with the genuineness of the transactions will constitute reasonable cause for not invoking the provisions of sections 271D and 271E. In this view of the matter also we cancel the order of penalty under sections 271D and 271E. 13. In the result, the appeals are allowed
-
1993 (4) TMI 99 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... of interest. Unit No. 2 was only an extension of the existing business and interest paid by the assessee was, therefore, admissible as the entire work was interconnected. Capital was borrowed by the assessee for extension of existing business and not for setting up a new business. There was nexus between the borrowed money and the amount invested in the machines. 8. We have considered the rival contentions and find that the order of the CIT(A) is based on correct appreciation of facts and law. The addition of amount of interest made by the Assessing Officer is not found to be justified, in view of the special features of the case. The amount of interest was not to be capitalised. We, therefore, uphold the order of the CIT(A). Ground No. 2 has, therefore, no force and is rejected. 9. Grounds Nos. 3 and 4 are general in nature and nothing specific has been argued, therefore, they do not call for any comments from us. 10. In the result, the appeal has no force and is dismissed.
-
1993 (4) TMI 98 - ITAT CALCUTTA-B
Revision Of Order, Order Prejudicial To Interests Of Revenue ... ... ... ... ..... s taken the view that in strict legal terms, the ownership of the flats may be with the assessee, but he goes on to say that factually and as per the existing laws of tenancy in the State, the lessee cannot be evicted from the flats and, therefore, the transaction is practically a transaction of sale. This view of the CIT is directly opposed to the observation of the Supreme Court in the decision cited above. Similarly, in the case of CWT v. Arvind Narottam 1988 173 ITR 479, the Supreme Court has held that where the true effect on the construction of the deed is clear, the appeal to discourage tax evasion based on the McDowell doctrine is not a relevant consideration. 15. We are therefore of the considered opinion that the CIT was not justified in taking the view that the assessments made on the appellants under section 143(1) of the Act were erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of revenue. The orders of the CIT are set aside. 16. In the result, the appeals are allowed.
-
1993 (4) TMI 97 - ITAT CALCUTTA-A
Business Expenditure, Development Allowance, Payment Of Club Bills ... ... ... ... ..... revented due to supervening impossibility which, in our opinion, should not come in the way, particularly when a benefit accrues to an assessee under law. We, therefore, find no infirmity in the direction of the Appellate Commissioner to process the claim of the assessee under section 33A upon receiving the certificates obtained by the assessee from the Tea Board. The direction in the impugned order in this regard is affirmed. 12. C. O. No. 171/Cal./1989-For the reasons given by us in ITA No. 3186/Cal/1989 while dealing with the first ground relating to payment of club bills of the executives of the assessee-company, we dismiss the objection raised by the assessee that the Appellate Commissioner ought to have directed the deletion of sum of Rs. 19,355 representing payment of club bills of Tollygunge Club of 5 executives of the assessee-company. 13. In the result, the appeal filed by the department is partly allowed while the cross objection filed by the assessee is dismissed.
-
1993 (4) TMI 96 - ITAT CALCUTTA-A
Accounting Year, Appellate Authority, Assessing Officer ... ... ... ... ..... hold against the appellant (assessee) and cause prejudice to her. The Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT v. G.M. Chennabasappa 1959 35 ITR 261 and the Bombay High Court in the case of J.B. Greaves v. CIT 1963 49 ITR 107 have held that it is not open to the Tribunal to make out a new case for the assessee by taking up grounds or arguments or indulge in guesses and conjectures which the assessee never raised before the Tribunal or the lower authorities. What applies to Tribunal equally applies to the First Appellate Authorities under the tax laws. 9. From the above discussion we are clearly of the opinion that there was a valid and complete gift of Rs.1 lac in favour of the assessee and the same was not a colourable transaction or a dubious device or a facade of gift, as observed by the A.C. in the impugned order. The sum of Rs. 1 lac, therefore, deserves to be deleted and we direct accordingly. The impugned order is vacated and the appeal of the assessee is allowed.
-
1993 (4) TMI 95 - ITAT CALCUTTA-A
Appeal To Supreme Court, High Court, Per Annum, Previous Year, S. 13 ... ... ... ... ..... t the sum of Rs. 52,240 being interest received on the deposit of the award money from the bank is not assessable being casual or non-recurring income. The said interest income has accrued to the assessee and is not a casual or non-recurring in nature. It has been held by the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of RM. AR. AR. RM. AR. AR. Ramanathan Chettiar v. CIT 1967 63 ITR 458 that the expression casual must be construed in its plain and ordinary sense and a receipt of interest which is foreseen and anticipated cannot be regarded as casual even if it is not likely to recur again. Therefore, the addition of Rs. 52,240 as interest from bank made by the Assessing Officer is proper. 6. The ground regarding charging of interest under section 217 by the Assessing Officer though taken in the grounds of appeal was not pressed and argued. Therefore, no decision is given on it. 7. No other point is urged in this appeal. 8. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed as indicated above
-
1993 (4) TMI 94 - ITAT BOMBAY-D
Assessing Officer, Bona Fide, Capital Gains, Cost Of Acquisition, Penalty For Concealment, S. 10
-
1993 (4) TMI 93 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-C
... ...
... ... ..... learned first appellate authority for fresh decision in the light of our observation made therein. Keeping that finding in focus, we vacate the finding under challenge and restore the matter to the file of the learned CIT(A) for fresh decision keeping our observation in view made for asst. yr. 1983-84. We direct accordingly. 28. Another issue raised on behalf of the Revenue is against the confirmation of the withdrawal of Rs. 33,000 considering sufficient for assessee s household expenses. 29. After hearing the submissions and perusing the record and keeping our findings on this issue for asst. yr. 1983-84 in the assessee s case in view, we confirm the estimate of household expenses for the year under consideration at Rs. 36,000. Order under challenge is modified to the above extent. 30. In the result the Revenue s appeal is allowed in part. 31. ITA No. 646/Ahd/1987 is allowed for statistical purposes whereas C.O. No. 44/Ahd/87 and ITA No. 2715/Ahd/1988 are allowed in part.
-
1993 (4) TMI 92 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-C
... ...
... ... ..... TO by a letter dt. 4th Feb., 1974 called upon the assessee to state the basis for working out deduction due to rain wash at 10 . There was no indication that the ITO had detected the deduction made once in the trading account and the other in the statement of accounts by the assessee. The assessee submitted a revised return on 11th March, 1974 (i.e. after issue of letter dt. 4th Feb., 1974 by the ITO) declaring a total income of Rs. 1,58,917 the difference being an amount of Rs. 57,000 which was debited twice. On these facts the Hon ble High Court held that levy of penalty under s. 271(1)(c) was not valid as the assessee had disclosed such income voluntarily in the revised income. In view of the aforesaid judgment and in view of the elaborate reasons given in the order of the learned CIT(A) we confirm the findings on merits also. In view of aforesaid discussions, there is no justification in interfering with the order of the CIT(A). 7. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.
-
1993 (4) TMI 91 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-B
... ...
... ... ..... for the assessee relied upon the judgment of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Malabar Fisheries Co. vs. CIT (1979) 12 CTR (SC) 415 (1979) 120 ITR 49 (SC) and the learned Departmental Representative has relied on the reasons recorded in the orders of the Departmental authorities. 4. After considering the rival submissions made by the learned representatives, we are of the considered opinion that the assessee s contention is fully supported by the judgment of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Malabar Fisheries Co. and by a decision of the ITAT, Ahmedabad Bench in the case of ITO vs. Pratik Prints (1991) 40 TTJ (Ahd) 173 (1991) 37 ITD 159 (Ahd) in which one of us, the Accountant Member was a party. Respectfully following the elaborate reasons given in the said order of the Tribunal, the assessee s contention is accepted and the ITO is directed to grant investment allowance to the assessee in accordance with the provisions of law. 5. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1993 (4) TMI 90 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-B
... ...
... ... ..... due to the assessee and if the attendant circumstances show that the interest had really not become due in the real sense of the term it should not be and cannot be taxed. He is right in mentioning that till date interest had not been received and further that s. 18(2) envisaged a position of interest being not taxed on accrual basis. His reliance on the Hon ble High Court decision in Calcutta Investment Co. Ltd. vs. CIT is also valid though in that case the item of interest was taxable as business income while in the case before us it is taxable as interest on securities. The contentions enumerated in cls. (i) to (vi) of para 5 of the order of CIT(A) on pages 4 and 5 thereof do constitute a background in which it can be said that interest on the impugned securities had not really fallen due and particularly so in view of Gujarat Government Notification treating Shree Vallabh Glass as relief undertaking. The addition of Rs. 91,129 is deleted. 8. Assessee s appeal is allowed.
-
1993 (4) TMI 89 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-B
... ...
... ... ..... in respect of employees of STDS Pvt. Ltd. was admissible under s. 37 of the IT Act. 35. After hearing the parties we find that ground No. 1 was covered in favour of assessee by the decision of Tribunal in the case of Sarabhai Chemicals P. Ltd. for asst. yr. 1976-77 referred to above and Department s reference application has been rejected by the Tribunal by order dt. 12th Aug., 1986 in R.A. Nos. 230 and 231/Ahd. It was submitted before us that reference to the High Court was also rejected by order dt. 7th Sept., 1987 in ITA No. 172 of 1987. We accordingly reject the said ground. 36. As regards second ground we find that the point in controversy was covered in favour of assessee by the decision of Gujarat High Court in the case reported in 128 ITR 712 (sic). We respectfully follow said decision and reject the ground raised by the Department. 37. The appeal ITA No. 743/Ahd/1983 is partly allowed. The appeal ITA No. 856/Ahd/1983 is allowed. The Departmental appeal is dismissed.
-
1993 (4) TMI 88 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-B
Assessing Officer, Backward Area, Book Entries, Industrial Undertaking, Profits And Gains ... ... ... ... ..... expenses on interest and legal and professional fees, etc. were incurred during this year. On our request a copy of the profit and loss account has been furnished which shows on the credit side a sum of Rs. 1,438 by insurance return . It also shows sales of last year of Rs. 11,35,900 and profit of last year at Rs. 99,020. Thus, in the immediately preceding year there was substantial business and profit. In the previous year relevant to this year there was some credit in the profit and loss account but net amount was the debit. The claim for this deduction deserves to be accepted. We do so. 9. Ground No. 5 objects to the disallowance of Rs. 5,000 out of staff welfare expenses. The departmental authorities have noted the figures of total expenses and we find that they are not fully vouched. They have also noted that the expenses are on high side. The estimate of Rs. 5,000 for disallowance is reasonable and deserves to be upheld. We do so. 10. Assessee s appeal is partly allowed
-
1993 (4) TMI 87 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-B
Business Expenditure, Business Loss, Capital Loss, Equity Shares, Income From Other Sources, Industrial Undertaking, Set Off Against Capital Gains
............
|
