Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 101 to 120 of 2969 Records
-
1993 (12) TMI 93 - ITAT COCHIN
Assessee's Appeal, Assessing Officer, Assessment Proceedings, Assessment Year, Cash Credits, Delay In Filing Appeal, In Part
-
1993 (12) TMI 92 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
Penalty, For Concealment Of Income ... ... ... ... ..... ying of penalty of Rs. 12,500. The Assessing Officer did not controvert the above claim. In fact, he failed to consider the aforesaid explanation and without placing any material to the contrary rejected the same as an after-thought . The aforesaid conclusion as already noted is not based on any material and in the light of stand taken by the assessee and evidence led by it cannot be accepted as correct. Thus on material it has to be held that no case for levying penalty has been established by the revenue in the present case. On the contrary, there is material to show that the assessee acted bona fidely and placed all facts and material relating to computation of his total income and the present case is not covered by explanation or by main section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act. No penalty under the above provision in this case was exigible. For these reasons, levy of penalty is held to be bad in law and is hereby cancelled. In the result, the assessee s appeal is allowed.
-
1993 (12) TMI 91 - ITAT CALCUTTA-E
Income, Deemed To Accrue Or Arise In India. ... ... ... ... ..... , the taxability of the interest income has to be judged by reference to the provisions of section 9(1)(v). We have to only see whether the conditions prescribed by sub-clause (c) are satisfied or not. We have already seen that they have not been satisfied. The observations of the CIT(A) that the assessee has not clarified the nature and source of the deposit must be read in the context of the view taken by him that the provisions of section 9(1)(i) are applicable. We have held that those provisions are not applicable. It is therefore our view that it is unnecessary to consider the nature and source of the deposit in view of our conclusion that the interest income has to be dealt with by section 9(1)(v) of the Act. 10. In the view we have taken it becomes unnecessary for us to consider the decisions of the Supreme Court referred to by the CIT(A). 11. For these reasons, we accept the appeal and hold that the interest income of Rs. 3,86,734 must be excluded from the assessment.
-
1993 (12) TMI 90 - ITAT CALCUTTA-E
Deductions, Profits Retained For Export Business ... ... ... ... ..... the High Court that if such method was followed, in that event, before any income is ascertained which is assessable under the Income-tax Act, the deduction will be made. But, it is not the intention of the section . It was further clarified that only from the income computed under the Income-tax Act for the purpose of assessment can deduction under section 80G be allowed. This means that the agricultural income which is apportioned at 60 of the composite income and which does not enter the field of taxation under the Income-tax Act cannot be considered at all for the purpose of allowing deduction under section 80HHC. We are respectfully bound by the judgment of the Calcutta High Court. We are therefore unable to accept the contention of the assessee. 11. The result is that the order of the CIT(A) on this point is reversed. The ITO s order is restored insofar as it relates to the deduction under section 80HHC. 12. This para is not reproduced here as it involve minor issues.
-
1993 (12) TMI 89 - ITAT CALCUTTA-B
Assessment Order, Assessment Year, Industrial Undertaking, Orders Prejudicial To Interests, Original Assessment, Sales Tax Liability
-
1993 (12) TMI 88 - ITAT BOMBAY-D
Deduction, Profits Retained For Export Business ... ... ... ... ..... -85. In our opinion, the ratio will be applicable to the facts of the present case also. Explanation (ba) was inserted by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1991, retrospectively to remove an anomaly which came into existence from 1-4-1986 and not 1-4-1987. We, therefore, hold that Explanation (ba) is clarificatory and should be applied retrospectively from 1-4-1986. In this view of the matter, freight and insurance have been rightly deducted by the assessee from the total turnover and the Commissioner of Income-tax was not justified in directing the Assessing Officer not to deduct the same. In this regard, we have also noted that the order under section 263 of the Act was passed on 30-12-1988 when the benefit of the amendment brought by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1991, mentioned above, was not available to the Commissioner. 13. For the above reasons, we vacate the order of the Commissioner, passed under section 263 of the Act, and restore the assessment order. 14. The appeal is allowed.
-
1993 (12) TMI 87 - ITAT BOMBAY-B
Depreciation, Extra Shift Allowance, Investment Allowance ... ... ... ... ..... ngs exemplified in entry 22 of the Eleventh Schedule such as typewriters, calculating machines etc. The apex court has laid down that the Explanation cannot go beyond the main provision. The words office machines and apparatus as used in the statute are associated noscitur a sociis with the words, typewriters, calculating machines, cash registering machines, cheque writing machines, intercom machines and teleprinters. Data processing machine bears a different colour and cannot be associated with these machines. It is, therefore, not an office appliance hence does not find place within the Eleventh Schedule, entry 22. As such, assessee is entitled to get benefit of investment allowance and also deduction under section 80-I. In view of this, there was no error in the order of the A.O. The conditions precedent for invoking the jurisdiction under section 263 did not exist in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 10. In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed.
-
1993 (12) TMI 86 - ITAT BOMBAY-B
Deductions, Profits Retained For Export Business ... ... ... ... ..... on-physical category which as stands amply demonstrated by para 34.2 and 34.3 of the Explanatory Circular, relevant provisions reproduced above not found to be covered by the provisions of section 80HHC in respect of which the benefit was extended for a specified period by the New provisions of section 80HHE. In the case of the assessee as stated above their Computer Programme was recorded on Tapes/Discs which have considerable weight and mass occupying sufficient space and thus tangible and consequently fell within both the terms goods as well as merchandise used by section 80HHC. In our considered opinion therefore from all angles - the Dictionary meaning, the meaning accorded to the relevant word by other statutes and the Constitution of India and/or interpretation by the Apex Court, the Computer Software exported by the assessee unmistakably fell within the purview of section 80HHC entitling them to the deduction specified therein. 35. In the result the appeal is allowed.
-
1993 (12) TMI 85 - ITAT BANGALORE
... ... ... ... ..... mputation of capital. 8. After taking into consideration all the above facts and the arguments of both the sides as mentioned above, we finally come to the conclusion that because of inclusion of the surplus (corresponding to unappropriated profits in the UK accounts) and of general reserve (corresponding to reinstatement of capital expenditure on scientific research in the UK account) within the computation of capital base of the assessee-company for all the four years under consideration, the assessment orders passed by the Assessing Officer cannot be considered to have been erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of revenue. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the CIT had no jurisdiction to try to revise those assessment orders by resorting to his powers under section 16(2) of the Surtax Act. The impugned combined order of the CIT for all the four years is, therefore, being cancelled by us. 9. In the result, all the four appeals as filed by the assessee, are allowed.
-
1993 (12) TMI 84 - ITAT BANGALORE
Book Profits, Computation Of ... ... ... ... ..... r modification order and to deny interest on that amount. The Commissioner (Appeals) has merely come up with an alternative suggestion that even if the amount be considered as interest on interest, it would still be allowable to the assessee in accordance with the abovementioned decisions of Gujarat High Court and Supreme Court. We are fully in agreement with the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals). There is no justification on the part of the department to deny the benefit of some portion of refund already declared as interest in a later modification order and to deny interest thereon. The Gujarat High Court decision as mentioned above is also acceptable to us. We, therefore, do not find any merit in the departmental ground taken in this regard. The departmental ground on this issue is, therefore, being dismissed. 17. In the result, the departmental appeal in the case of M/s. Widia (India) Ltd. is partly allowed whereas the same in the case of other assessees are allowed.
-
1993 (12) TMI 83 - ITAT BANGALORE
Assessing Officer, Assessment Year, Set Off ... ... ... ... ..... ts of the assessees and hence as judicial authorities, we are not in a position to subscribe to the view expressed in that circular. 15. Finally, we find that it is not possible for us to agree with the different findings arrived at by the ITAT, Hyderabad Bench, in the case of V. V. Trans-Investments (P.) Ltd. On the other hand, we are inclined to agree with the decision of the Single Member Bench, Madras, as Buttwelded Tools (P.) Ltd. s case and also by the Bombay Bench of the ITAT in the two other unreported cases as mentioned above. We hereby hold that for the purpose of section 115J(1A)(iv), the expression the amount of loss must be construed to have the same meaning as in clause (b) of the first proviso to sub-section (1) of section 205 of the Companies Act, 1956, and that the loss must be the loss after charging depreciation to the accounts. In this view, we uphold the decision of the CIT(A) in both the appeals. 16. In the result, the departmental appeals are dismissed.
-
1993 (12) TMI 82 - ITAT ALLAHABAD-A
Actual Cost, Assessing Officer, Assessment Year, Borrowed Capital, Claim For Depreciation, Earned Income, Earning Income, Expenditure On Repair, In Part, Rejection Of Accounts
-
1993 (12) TMI 80 - ITAT ALLAHABAD-A
A Partner, In Part, Investment Allowance ... ... ... ... ..... d stands fully covered by various decisions of the Hon ble Supreme Court and the said cases were also cited by the assessee before him and despite that without discussing the said decisions the learned CIT had only set aside that issue for the Assessing Officer to decide it afresh. Like-wise the various other small issues taken up in his order were also more or less either covered by the various decisions of Hon ble various High Courts or there was no evidence on record to conclude otherwise than what the Assessing Officer had arrived at. With all these in the background and following the above decisions of various High Courts relied upon by the counsel for the assessee, we are of the opinion that the order passed by the learned CIT cannot be allowed to sustain. We accordingly cancel the said order and restore the order passed by the ITO which was, in our opinion, passed after due scrutiny of all the facts and circumstances of the case. 45. As a result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1993 (12) TMI 79 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-B
Investment Allowance, Withdrawal Of ... ... ... ... ..... ies in relation to withdrawal of investment allowance. The judgment of the Hon ble Gujarat High Court fully supports the view taken by the CIT(A). 9. The view taken by the CIT(A) is also clearly supported by the decision of the ITAT in the case of Pradeepkumar Chelaram Arora in which it has been held that mere debiting of the investment allowance reserve account and crediting of the capital account of the partners would not be sufficient for the ITO to withdraw investment allowance under section 155(4A). In that case also the assessee in the very next year had purchased new machinery worth Rs. 1,96,096 and consequently it was held that the amount of investment allowance reserve had been utilised for purchase of new machinery. The withdrawal of investment allowance made under section 155(4A) was not sustained. 10. In view of the aforesaid discussions, we are of the considered opinion that the view taken by the CIT(A) requires no interference. 11. All the appeals are dismissed.
-
1993 (12) TMI 78 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-B
Assessing Officer, Assessment Year, Discretionary Trust, Market Value, Net Wealth, Wealth Tax
-
1993 (12) TMI 77 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-A
Business Expenditure ... ... ... ... ..... e relief which we have directed in the foregoing paragraph, the advance tax paid by the assessee would be certainly within the statutory margin of 75 per cent laid down in the Act. Therefore, on the facts of the case, levy of interest under section 215 is not called for at all. 27. So far as the other issue relating to interest under section 139(8) is concerned, the question of levy would require reconsideration in the light of the tax liability as may be determined after giving effect to this order. The matter is, accordingly, remitted to the ITO for reconsideration of the question relating to levy of interest under section 139(8). In the view which we have taken it is not considered necessary to go into other aspects of the matter. We, therefore, do not consider it necessary to give our finding on other issues raised by Shri Shah which we have set out earlier. 28. The appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as partly allowed.
-
1993 (12) TMI 76 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
Valuation (Customs) ... ... ... ... ..... of tool bits. 10.For the aforesaid reasons the review proposal must fail. It is ordered accordingly. 11.In passing it may be mentioned that views in order-in-revision No. 242-244/93 dated 22-6-1993 are not something which cannot be modified. The revisionary authority is always open to modify its orders for future cases, provided, however, full information on the above lines is forthcoming and presented. As a matter of fact Government will be too happy if after categorisation on above lines different prices are applied uniformally to different categories after necessary market enquiries by the Customs House, who will no doubt prescribe to indication of some minimum attributes to be given on the assessment/description of goods by the examining, valuation officers. In so far as the party s own application is concerned its plea for re-export having already been allowed by Collector (Appeals) on a nominal fine no interference therewith is warranted. 12.It is ordered accordingly.
-
1993 (12) TMI 75 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
Confiscation and penalty ... ... ... ... ..... one of the witnesses that applicant never accompanied them to Dandi (The other witness says he signed post facto) assumes significance here. Finally, in this case the seizure was made by the Police and, therefore, provision of Section 123 also cannot be invoked. R. Ramesh v. Collector of Customs, Madras, 1987 (27) E.L.T. 675 (T) . 10. In view of the above discussion confiscation of goods is upheld as the applicant has denied ownership of yarn. As he claimed ownership of soaps whereupon Section 123 of Customs Act, 1962, becomes applicable to these goods. Confiscation of soaps is also upheld as licit acquisition is not proved. Government, however, grant benefit of doubt to the applicant in respect of his alleged connection with the main goods, and accordingly set aside imposition of personal penalty. In regard to the two dozen soaps, this being a trivial offence a mere warning should suffice. It is ordered accordingly. 11. The revision application is disposed of in above terms.
-
1993 (12) TMI 74 - SC ORDER
Writ jurisdiction ... ... ... ... ..... m the submission whether even in those cases the High Court was examining the matter even though similar remission-applications were pending. 2. We make it clear that if the petitioner withdraws the remission- application and approaches the High Court, the High Court might examine the matter without reference to the delay if other similar matters are pending. 3. The petition for special leave is disposed of finally.
-
1993 (12) TMI 73 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Prosecution - Customs ... ... ... ... ..... e nature of the goods, he would not have allowed them to be kept in his house. Therefore, the case of the accused that he was not aware of the contents of the gunny bags cannot be accepted. Hence, it is clear that he was aware that foreign goods had been brought to his house. As pointed out by the Court below, there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever to show that there was any permit in respect of the said foreign goods, or any duty had been paid for them. The accused should have known that they are liable for confiscation. In these circumstances, under Section 135(1)(b) of the Customs Act, even keeping any foreign goods by any person which he knows or has reason to believe are liable to confiscation shall be punishable. Therefore, rightly the trial Court has convicted and sentenced him and the appellate Court has confirmed the same. I do not find any reason whatsoever to interfere with the said conviction and sentence. Accordingly, the criminal revision case is dismissed.
............
|