|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 121 to 140 of 1060 Records
-
2013 (5) TMI 946 - ITAT JAIPUR
... ...
... ... ..... fore, have erred in bringing to tax the income from capital gains in his hand though the same may be a subject matter of taxation in the hands of the real owners. In this view of the matter, the addition so made being unjust and uncalled for, the same is directed to be deleted. 14. In so far as in ground No. 2 in appeal, the assessee has challenged the sustenance of disallowance of expenses of ₹ 74,923/- against his business income as the same is not shown to have been incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business. 15. Having heard parties, we find no reason to interfere with the well reasoned decision of Ld. CIT(A) in sustenance of such disallowance as the assessee has not laid any evidence to show that such expenses were laid for the purpose of his business. For lack of evidence, the disallowance so made, does not call for any interference. 16. In the result, appeal by the assessee stands partly allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 27.05.2013.
-
2013 (5) TMI 945 - ITAT LUCKNOW
Rejection of books of accounts u/s 145(3) - Unexplained Expenditure u/s 69C - Assessee was using the project completion method of accounting for years. Assessee's books of accounts were rejected by A.O. as he did not produce them during assessment proceedings. CIT(A) reexamined the issue and estimated the profit at 10% of the gross receipts after approving the rejection of the books of account. Also, ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition made by the A.O. u/s 69C of the IT. Act, 1961. - HELD THAT:- The approach adopted by the ld. CIT(A) regarding estimated income and Section 69C is correct and reasonable in comparison to the AO, thus approved the order of the ld. CIT(A).
-
2013 (5) TMI 944 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... een the parties. Cognizance of the offences had been rightly taken by the learned Magistrate and charges, as we find, have been correctly framed by the learned trial Judge. A victim of a crime has as much right to get justice from the court as an accused who enjoys the benefit of innocence till the allegations are proven against him. In the case at hand, when an order of quashment of summons has been obtained by suppression, this Court has an obligation to set aside the said order and restore the order framing charges and direct the trial to go on. And we so direct. 19. Consequently, the appeal is allowed, the order passed by the High Court in Criminal Revision No. 327 of 2011 and the order passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, No.1, Jodhpur, in Criminal Revision No. 7 of 2009 are set aside and it is directed that the trial which is pending before the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, No. 3, Jodhpur, shall proceed in accordance with law.
-
2013 (5) TMI 943 - ITAT LUCKNOW
... ...
... ... ..... ion 147 of the Act cannot be questioned. 18. Having heard the rival submissions and from a careful perusal of record, we find that undisputedly reopening of assessment was done by invoking the provisions of section 147 of the Act after recording reasons on the basis of the DVO’s report. Since the reasons were recorded on the basis of the DVO’s report and the Assessing Officer has not formed his own belief that the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment, the reopening is not valid in the light of various judicial pronouncements referred to by the ld. CIT(A) in his order. The ld. CIT(A) has examined this issue in the light of various judicial pronouncements in the right perspective and since we do not find any infirmity therein, we confirm his order. Since the assessment is annulled, we find no justification to adjudicate the appeals on merit. 19. In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 28/05/2013.
-
2013 (5) TMI 942 - ITAT AMRITSAR
... ...
... ... ..... ctible on accrued interest on FDRs of Jammu Development Authority with J & K Bank Ltd. Keeping in view the above discussions, we hold that no interference is called for in the well reasoned impugned order passed by the ld. first appellate authority and accordingly we uphold the same. Hence, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No.206(Asr)/2011 is dismissed.” 15.1. In such facts and circumstances, we find no infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT(A), since on identical facts, the issue is covered by our own decision in ITA Nos. 206 to 210(Asr), dated 24.04.2012 mentioned hereinabove and the arguments of Ld DR on per incuriam cannot be entertained being without any basis. Therefore, we do not find any infirmitccy in the order of the ld. CIT(A), who has rightly deleted the disallowance. Thus, ground No.5 of the Revenue is dismissed. 16. In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No.206(Asr)/2013 is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 28th May, 2013.
-
2013 (5) TMI 941 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ying in warehouse. within the jurisdiction of respondent no. 3. According to him, the aforesaid applications have not been decided so far, hence the present writ petition. We see no reason why the aforesaid applications of the petitioner are not being disposed of by respondent no. 3 even after passage of almost two years. In such circumstances, the instant writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent no. 3 to decide the aforesaid applications of the petitioner within a period of one month from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.
-
2013 (5) TMI 940 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... amp; Transports v ACIT (supra) has already been overruled by the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in case of CIT Vs. Crescant Export Syndicate and, therefore, provisions of TDS are applicable on amount already paid during the assessment year as well as amount remaining payable at the end of the assessment year, therefore, we confirm the addition amounting to ₹ 68,52,119/-. As far as issue regarding hire charge is concerned, it seems that some of the agreements were also not filed and properly considered by the Assessing Officer as well as Ld. CIT(A), therefore, in the interest of justice, we set aside the order of Ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of Assessing Officer with a direction to reexamine the issue and determine whether any hire charges to the extent of ₹ 5,27,528/- are there and then decide the issue in accordance with law. 32. In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed. (Order Pronounced in the Open Court on this 17/05/2013)
-
2013 (5) TMI 939 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... gency to carry out the preservation and maintenance works, the cost of which will be borne by the petitioner. In case Air India Ltd requires that the engine be moved from the customs bonded warehouse to a designated MRO for fitting onto an air craft for testing the same, it would only be permissible if the petitioner furnishes a provisional release bond for the period as may be specified by Air India Ltd. Once the testing and maintenance is over, the engine will be placed back in the customs bonded warehouse. We also make it clear that these directions are without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties. Mr Mehra, learned ASG appearing on behalf of the respondent No. 3 states that Customs Authorities are contemplating action qua the engine and have also initiated proceedings. It is obvious that those actions and proceedings would be in accordance with law. With these directions this application stands disposed of. Dasti under the signature of the Court Master.
-
2013 (5) TMI 938 - ITAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... ost relating to the AE sales is required to be computed by reducing the profit element at the rate of 3.35 declared by the assessee and to the said operating cost, PLI of 6.28 has to be applied to get arms length price of AE sales. In view of the amendment to Proviso of section 92 C (2) by the Finance Act 2012 with retrospective, benefit of standard deviation of /- 5 can be allowed only when the variation between the arms length price as determined and the price at which the international transaction had actually been undertaken does not exceed /-5 margin. In our view, The TP adjustment is required to be recomputed in the light of observations made in this order. We, therefore, set aside the order of CIT (A) and restore the matter to the file of AO/TPO for fresh order after necessary examination and after allowing opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 6. In the result both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 6th May, 2013
-
2013 (5) TMI 937 - CESTAT BANGALORE
... ...
... ... ..... itional Commissioner (AR) has also been heard on this aspect. Again we have found favour with the arguments of the learned counsel. 6. With regard to the demand of ₹ 17,15,138/-, the learned counsel has submitted that the entire demand relates to a period prior to enactment of Section 66A. Moreover, the demand is on reimbursement of expenses incurred by the foreign companies/promoters with regard to the design, engineering, development of the airport project as per Shareholders Agreement and such reimbursements were not taxable prior to 18-4-2006. We have also heard the learned Additional Commissioner (AR). The learned counsel has, once again, made out a prima facie case. 7. There has been no serious debate on the CENVAT credit issue. 8. In the result, there will be waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery against the outstanding dues adjudged against the appellant. (Operative portion of this order was pronounced in open Court on conclusion of hearing)
-
2013 (5) TMI 936 - ITAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... nging to an ordinary house hold. Hon’ble Gujarat High Court therefore upheld the approach adopted by the Tribunal in following the said circular and giving benefit to the Assessee, observing that the same is in consonance with the general practice in the Indian families where jewellery is gifted by the relatives and friends at the time of social functions such as marriage, birthdays and other festivals etc. In our opinion, the issue involved in this appeal of the Revenue thus is squarely covered in favour of the Assessee by the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Ratanlal Vyaparilal Jain and respectively following the same. We uphold the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) treating the jewellery of ₹ 13,36,997/- found during the course of search as explained, relying on the CBDT Circular No. 1916 dated 11.05.1994. 5. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on this day 17th of May 2013.
-
2013 (5) TMI 935 - ITAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... f expenses. The second ground is against the deletion of addition of ₹ 2,55,654/-, being 50 of the money forfeited by the assessee from defaulters. 3. At the very outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee contended that similar issues came up for adjudication before the tribunal in assessee’s sister concern. Placing on record a copy of the order dated 10.04.2013 in the case of ITO vs. M/s. Royal Toshali Holiday Club Pvt. Ltd. vide ITA No. 6802/Mum/2012, it was shown that the Tribunal has upheld the deletion of similar additions. The ld. DR was fair enough to accept that the facts and circumstances of the present appeal are similar to those considered and decided by the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Royal Toshali Holiday Club (supra). In view of the rival but common submissions and respectfully following the precedent, we uphold the impugned order. 4. In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on this 10th day of May, 2013.
-
2013 (5) TMI 934 - ITAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... , wherein, it has been stated that income derived from the trust property has to be computed on commercial principles and if commercial principles are applied, then adjustment of expenses incurred by the trust for charitable purposes in the earlier years against the income earned by the trust in the subsequent year will have to be regarded as application of income of the trust for charitable purposes in subsequent year in which such adjustment has been made. Hence, there is no reason to interfere with the order of ld CIT(A). Accordingly, we uphold the same by rejecting ground No.3 of appeal taken by revenue. 10. The assessee has also filed cross objection being C.O No.153/M/2011 11. At the time of hearing, ld A.R. did not press cross objection filed by assessee. Hence, cross objection of the assessee is dismissed as not pressed. 12. In the result, appeal filed by revenue and cross objection filed by assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 17th May , 2013
-
2013 (5) TMI 933 - ITAT AHMEDABAD
Claim of additional depreciation of wind electric generator allowed - As far as application of section 32(1)(iia) of the Act, is concerned, what is required to be satisfied in order to claim the additional depreciation is that the setting up of a new machinery or plant should have been acquired and installed after 31-3-2002 by an assessee, who was already engaged in the business of manufacture or production of any article or thing. The said provision does not state that the setting up of a new machinery or plant, which was acquired and installed up to 31-3-2002 should have any operational connectivity to the article or thing that was already being manufactured by the assessee. Therefore, the contention that the setting up of a wind mill has nothing to do with the power industry, namely, manufacture of oil seeds etc. is totally not germane to the specific provision contained in section 32(1)(iia) of the Act.
-
2013 (5) TMI 932 - ITAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... vailable with company, provided said funds are sufficient to meet investment and hence no disallowance can be made. While following the said ratio, the fact that the assessee has interest free funds available are ₹ 5.09 crores cannot be disputed. However, neither the AO nor the Ld.CIT(A) has gone into materials as to the issue whether borrowed funds are utilized for the purpose of business or profession for claiming the deduction under section 36(1)(iii) of the Act, vis-à-vis on the issue of the impugned proportionate disallowance. In view of the matter, we set aside this issue to the file of the AO to verify the said fact after giving a due opportunity of hearing to the assessee and accordingly assess the claim made by the assessee. We direct and order accordingly. Thus ground no. 3 is allowed for statistical purpose. 4. In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is treated as partly allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on this 22nd day of May, 2013.
-
2013 (5) TMI 931 - CESTAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... efence use and not for selling in open market, it is not qualified as taxable service. The appellant have also annexed certificate issued by the works manager of the Ordnance Factory, Ambazari (Nagpur) accepting that the appellant is registered with them as a class (E) contractor for civil works since 2006-07 and further certified that the works executed by the appellant, is for purpose of use by Ministry of Defence. 8. In this view of the matter, it can be held that the construction works carried out by the appellant for Ordnance Factory is not classifiable as ‘Commercial or Industrial Construction Services’ under the Finance Act, 1994, and accordingly, the demand of tax and penalty confirmed on the appellant by Order-in-Original dated 9-9-2010, and upheld by Order-in-Appeal dated 13-1-2011 are set aside along with interest imposed. 9. This appeal is allowed along with stay application, with consequential relief. (Dictated and pronounced in open Court)
-
2013 (5) TMI 930 - CESTAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... ever in the agreement that the appellant has undertaken clearing and forwarding functions. Reliance placed by the Revenue on the Prabhat Zarda Factory (India) Ltd. case also shows that the activity undertaken by the appellant marketing/sales promotion agent. The said decision has been overruled by the Larger Bench of this Tribunal in the appellant’s own case wherein it was held that procuring purchase orders on commission basis would not come under the purview of “Clearing and Forwarding Agency Service” and is appropriately classifiable under “Business Auxiliary Service”. 7. In view of the decision of the Larger Bench of this Tribunal in the appellant’s own case, we are of the considered view that the activity undertaken by the appellant cannot be classified as “Clearing & Forwarding Agency service”. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal with consequential relief, if any. (Dictated in Court)
-
2013 (5) TMI 929 - CESTAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... owner, provision of Management, Maintenance or Repair operations in respect of property, would not constitute a taxable service. In the absence of any legislatively enjoined fiction, it would be impermissible to treat provision of service to oneself as provision of service to another. 3. On the aforesaid premise, we grant waiver of pre-deposit and stay all further proceedings, on condition that petitioner/assessee remits Service Tax as assessed and levied in respect of GTA service, including the penalties and interest in respect of that head of assessed services within four weeks and report compliance by 17-6-2013. In default either in deposit or reporting compliance within the stipulated time, stay granted shall stand dissolved on occurrence of the default without reference to the Tribunal. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner/assessee is present in the Court, has noted the order and this constitutes sufficient intimation to the assessee of the obligations under this order.
-
2013 (5) TMI 928 - CESTAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... factured by the assessee and this constitutes BAS as defined in the Act. Under Section 66A of the Act, an assessee is the recipient of BAS provided by the overseas company DTC and was thus obligated to remit service tax on the amounts remitted by it to DTC. 9. On the aforesaid analysis we find no justification for grant of waiver of the assessed liability of the petitioner/assessee nor grant of stay of recovery of the adjudicated amount. We grant eight weeks to the petitioner/assessee to make the deposit, for entertainment of hearing of the appeal and direct report of compliance by 18-7-2013. In default either in deposit or reporting compliance within the stipulated time, the appeal is liable to be rejected and dismissed for failure of pre-deposit. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner/assessee is present in the Court, has noted the order and this constitutes sufficient intimation to the assessee of the obligations under this order. Stay application is disposed of accordingly.
-
2013 (5) TMI 927 - CESTAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... the claimant only when he has not passed on the incidence of such duty or interest, if any paid, to any other person. In other words, the responsibility is cast on the assessee to prove that he has not passed on the incidence of tax paid by him to any other person. In the books of account of the assessee, the service tax paid has been shown as expenses and not as “amount receivable” from the department. If that be so, it cannot be presumed that the appellant has not passed on incidence of tax to any other person. In this view of the matter, we hold that the appellant has not fulfilled the condition relating to crossing the bar of unjust enrichment. Therefore, rejection of refund claim on this ground by the lower authorities is sustainable in law. However, since the service tax is not leviable, the amount of refund has to be credited to the Consumer Welfare Fund and we direct the department accordingly. The appeal is disposed of in above terms. (Dictated in Court)
............
|
