|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 101 to 120 of 167 Records
-
1983 (5) TMI 67 - ITAT DELHI-A
Income Tax Act, Words And Phrases ... ... ... ... ..... managed, the term of the assessee-udyog, its office-bearers, functions of the assessee, etc. Since one of the aims and objects of the assessee-udyog is to endeavour all-round development of the block area as brought out above, it can be safely said that this aim and object of the assessee-udyog is wide enough for us to hold that the assessee-udyog has been constituted in India under the 1947 Act for the purpose of planning, development or improvement of the villages within its block area. Further keeping in view the said bye-laws as also the preamble of the 1947 Act and the powers of the gaon panchayat, brought out by us above, the assessee-udyog is an authority constituted in India under law for the purpose of planning, development and/or improvement of villages in its block. That being the position, the income of the assessee-udyog being within the four corners of section 10(20A) is exempt from tax. We hold likewise. 7. In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed.
-
1983 (5) TMI 66 - ITAT CUTTACK
... ...
... ... ..... assessee. But when a bogus partnership firm is being put up, it clearly shows that this was done with the object of avoiding the payment of income-tax which the assessee was otherwise liable to pay. In the case before us the assessee has not created any partnership firm or other device for misleading the department or defrauding the revenue. On the other hand, it continued to remain the business apparatus as before but in reality the business was carried on by the son. We were told that ultimately the son has taken over the entire business after a few years. We, therefore, do not find any similarity between the facts of the case relied on by the department and the instant case. 10. Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, we come to the conclusion that the facts brought on record did not justify the levy of penalty as has been done by the revenue authorities. We therefore cancel the penalties for both the years. 11. In the result, the two appeals are allowed.
-
1983 (5) TMI 65 - ITAT COCHIN
Computing Value, Net Wealth ... ... ... ... ..... mber --- While agreeing with the conclusion of the Accountant Member that the assessee is entitled to exemption under section 5(1)(iv), I may add that our conclusion is supported by the view expressed by the Madras High Court recently in CWT v. K. Ramachandra Chettiar 1983 141 ITR 771. In that case the claim of the assessee, who owned a life-interest in a number of houses, for exemption under section 5(1)(iv) in respect of one of the houses was upheld by the Tribunal and the High Court held that the assessee was entitled to the relief under section 5(1)(iv) pointing out that the life-interest is a fractional interest in property falling short of the entire interest in it and in a case where the house in question is lived in by the tenant, exemption cannot be withheld from him under section 5(1)(iv). The ratio of this decision squarely applies to the facts of the present case. The claim of the assessee under section 5(1)(iv) is, therefore, allowed for all the assessment years.
-
1983 (5) TMI 64 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... he CIT(A) was justified in granting an opportunity to the assessee for explaining the items seizure-wise. According to us, there is no contradiction in para 27 of his order because it is overall consideration on the basis of which he framed the estimate by reducing the same by granting a reduction of Rs. 97,420 to the assessee out of Rs. 1,54,700 made by the ITO. 12. Regarding the grounds raised by the Revenue in its appeal, sum of Rs. 6,74,900 being on account of advances made by the assessee for purchases, is amply explained as discussed by the CIT(A). Addition on that account of Rs. 7 lakh and that of Rs. 84,000 as yield/interest is rightly deleted. Challenge to reduction in trading profit is also not warranted by the Revenue as it is on overall basis that it was reduced by Rs. 97,420. For the findings of the CIT(A) on all these issues as well, we adopt his reasoning while confirming his order as a whole for 1976-77. 13. In the result, all the three appeals are dismissed.
-
1983 (5) TMI 63 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... es related to a particular year nor was there any entry in relation thereto in the books of account of the assessee, yet the assessee may be taxed on a sum of Rs. 6,200 on the terms and conditions contained in the assessee s letter dt 18th November, 1977 which particularly makes mention that this was without in any way impairing their rights privileges etc. available to them under the law with regard to their innocence in the matter. Therefore having assessed the income of Rs. 6,200 for the asst. yr. 1976-77 there was no further cause for action for any other assessment year. The action of the ITO for assessing the disputed addition in the asst. yr. 1977-78 was therefore uncalled for on the entity of the facts and circumstances of the case. These additions are therefore deleted. 6. Hence the appeal for the asst. yr. 1976-77 is dismissed and for the asst yr. 1977-78 is allowed by deleting the addition of Rs. 11,218 constituted of the amounts of Rs. 10,603 Rs. 115 and Rs. 500.
-
1983 (5) TMI 62 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... ith the Fifth Schedule to the Act. The claim of the assessee is that it is covered under item 20 of this Schedule which is as under (20) Automobile ancillaries. After hearing the assessee and the revenue it is held that the claim, of the assessee is untenable because of the following reasons Automobile has been defined by the Chambers Twentieth Century Dictionary as a Motor-car. While interpreting s. 377(1) of Canadian Criminal Court, it was held in R.B. Rickman 85 C.C.C 399 that automobile does not include a motor-cycle. Motor-car or automobile, therefore, cannot be said to include a cycle worked by manual power. Since the assessee is manufacturing ancillaries of cycles, it cannot be said to be covered by Item 20 of the Fifth Schedule mentioned supra. Therefore, the claim of the assessee was rightly rejected by the authorities below and rebate at 15 only as admissible was allowed. There ground Nos 4, 5 and 6 pertaining to this claim are dismissed. 8. Appeal allowed in part.
-
1983 (5) TMI 61 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... f the case. In the present case we are satisfied that there was abundant evidence justifying the levy of penalty. Under the circumstances, the penalty is leviable. 13. Coming to the quantum, we accept the contention of the ld. counsel for the assessee that it should be computed on the basis of law when wrongful act was committed and in that regard his reliance on the Supreme Court decision in the case of Brij Mohan vs. CIT, New Delhi (1979) 12 CTR (SC) 198 (1979) 120 ITR 1 (SC) is rightly placed. The ITO is, therefore, directed to recompute the amount of penalty after verifying the date when return was filed and on the basis of law which was then prevalent. We have directed the ITO to compute the amount of penalty as per alternative submission made by the ld. counsel for the assessee as no working of the same in a figure of Rs. 9,100 as per assessee was made available to us. 14. In the result, the assessee s appeal shall be treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes.
-
1983 (5) TMI 60 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... the findings of the Tribunal or the view of the Tribunal whether s. 80J is directory or procedural. There is also no question raised about the procedural nature of s. 139(9). The question as framed, therefore, does not arise out of the order of the Tribunal and cannot be referred to the Hon ble High Courts. 4. The Tribunal has also reiterated the principles laid down by the Hon ble Courts that in the procedure of assessment under the IT Act, the principles of natural justice are required to be followed by the authorities concerned. The principle has been incorporated in s. 139(9) of the Act. Taking into consideration the directory nature of the provisions s. 80J(6A) of the Act and the procedural character of s. 139(9), the Tribunal only required the authorities below to entertain the claim of the assessee as the facts were on record, the claim had been made and it could be decided on merits. We, therefore, reject the reference application. 5. Reference application dismissed.
-
1983 (5) TMI 59 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
Partnership Deed ... ... ... ... ..... pports the case of the assessee, because here, the position is reverse. When one of the two partners was minor, there was no deed. When both of them attained majority, they had executed a deed of partnership and on that basis they filed the registration application. 11. Reliance of the learned departmental representative on the case of Jupiter Foundry and Machines (Knives) is misplaced due to distinction in facts. This is the first year of accounting. There could not be any partnership between major and minor effected when one of the partners was minor, a question of reconstitution or succession is far-fetched a thought which was attempted to be adopted by the learned departmental representative. 12. In the light of above discussion and mainly relying on the case of B. N. Dheer and Sons, the assessee s claim of registration for the period from 15-7-1977 to 31-3-1978, for the year under consideration, is directed to be accepted. 13. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed.
-
1983 (5) TMI 58 - ITAT CALCUTTA-C
... ...
... ... ..... keeping in view the ratio of the decision of the above cited cases. The AAC has taken note of the point that in the computation of income-tax assessment, the concerned ITO considered the house property income in the hands of the assessee. This point has not been refuted before us. That apart, the WTO has included the same property in the net wealth, while simultaneously declined to allow relief u/s. 5(1)(iv). In our view, the action of the WTO on the facts of the case cannot be sustained and we are of the view that the AAC committed no error in allowing the claim of the assessee. 10. As mentioned earlier, the WTO has disallowed the claim of the assessee on identical grounds and reasons. The AAC, vide his consolidated order referred to above, allowed the claim of the assessee. In view of what we have decided earlier for the asst. yr. 1975-76, the claims of the assessee for the other two years are also to be allowed. 11. In the result, the appeals by the revenue are dismissed.
-
1983 (5) TMI 57 - ITAT CALCUTTA-C
... ...
... ... ..... nion that the CIT (A) erred in deleting the amount on the facts of the case. The CIT (A) has wrongly applied the ratio of the decision in the case of Bombay Samachar as we find that the facts of the present case before us are distinguishable. In this view of the matter, and in view of what we have discussed in the preceding paragraphs, the interest payment partly disallowed by the ITO was valid and proper. Accordingly, the order of the CIT (A) has to be reversed. 7. The cross-objections are by the assessee by which the assessee has simply supported the order of the CIT (A) stating that the CIT(A) was fully justified in deleting the above mentioned amount. In view of what we have decided in the departmental appeal, the cross objection become infructuous and are to be dismissed as such. 8. Accordingly, the order of the CIT (A) is reversed and that of the ITO is restored. In the result, the appeal by the revenue is allowed and the cross-objections of the assessee are dismissed.
-
1983 (5) TMI 56 - ITAT CALCUTTA-C
... ...
... ... ..... CIT (A) did so as no finding was recorded by the ITO before charging of interest. But as pointed out by the Hon ble Supreme Court, the duty of the appellate authority does not end in declaring that certain action is illegal, but necessary and appropriate directions should have been given, which the CIT (A) in the instant case has failed to do. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that the order of the CIT (A) cannot be sustained and the matter requires to be restored to the file or the ITO for recording the facts and findings whether there was an under-estimate of advance-tax etc., before the ITO can come to the conclusion that charging of interest u/s 216 has to be made. With that end in view, the matter is restored to the file of the ITO for fresh disposal in accordance with law and after giving the assessee an opportunity of being heard. 11. In the result, the appeal by the revenue is allowed for statistical purposes.
-
1983 (5) TMI 55 - ITAT CALCUTTA-C
Banking Company, High Court, Legal Expenses, Revenue Expenditure ... ... ... ... ..... ble deduction even under section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act. The claim is, therefore, disallowed. It follows, therefore, that the ITO did not examine the details of the legal expenses submitted by the assessee properly, as otherwise he would have come to the conclusion that the expenditure incurred to the tune of Rs. 81,571 was in the nature of capital expenditure and, as such, was not entitled for deduction in computing the income of the assessee. That would have been in consonance with his own findings made in paragraph 7 of his order while discussing the admissibility of the claim in respect of Rs. 25,24,639, being interest paid on bonds and debentures issued to the shareholders of Dena Bank Ltd. The Commissioner was, accordingly, justified in holding that the ITO s order was erroneous insofar as it was prejudicial to the interests of the revenue. We, accordingly, uphold the order of the Commissioner under section 263. 7. In the result, the assessee s appeal is dismissed.
-
1983 (5) TMI 54 - ITAT CALCUTTA-A
... ...
... ... ..... nfirmed that action of the ITO by observing as under This is in accordance with I.T. Rules. In the table of rates for depreciation given in the I.T. Rules it has been stated that the calculation of the extra allowance for double shift working and for triple shift working shall be made separately in the proportion which the number of days for which the concern worked double shift or triple shift as the case may be, bears to the normal number of working days during the previous year. The normal number of working days for a non-seasional factory is to be taken as the number of days on which the factory or concern actually worked or 240 days whichever is greater. The appellant s contention on this point is accordingly not accepted. We do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the CIT(A) on this point, since the claim of the triple shift depreciation, as allowed by the ITO, seems to us to be in accordance with law. 9. In the result, the appeals fail and are dismissed.
-
1983 (5) TMI 53 - ITAT CALCUTTA-A
Assessment Year ... ... ... ... ..... ted to the amount of the deposit made during the financial year 1976-77 and the company will not be able to make any further deposit after the expiry of the financial year 1976-77 in lieu of its liability towards surcharge on income-tax, whether such liability arises on self-assessment or is determined on assessment or in any subsequent proceedings by way of rectification, appeal or revision. The fact that the assessee company made deposit of Rs. 15 lakhs with the IDBI on 15-12-1976, i.e., within the financial year 1976-77 was not in dispute. That being the position, it has to be held that the assessee company was entitled to the benefit of set off of Rs. 15 lakhs against the amount of surcharge payable by it for the assessment year 1977-78 in view of the clear provisions of the Act as also the contents of the Board s circular mentioned hereinbefore. The orders of the lower authorities on this count are, accordingly, reversed. 18. The appeal by the assessee is partly allowed.
-
1983 (5) TMI 52 - ITAT CALCUTTA-A
Capital Expenditure, Carrying On Business, Revenue Expenditure ... ... ... ... ..... s made for the business needs of the assessee, by making the gate in the garden and installing a statue in the garden, the assessee sought to gain an advantage of an enduring nature and when the expenditure is incurred for bringing into existence an advantage of enduring nature, such expenditure is certainly referable to expenditure on capital account. In appeal, at the instance of the assessee, the Allahabad High Court upheld the viewpoint of the Tribunal. Thus, following the principle laid down in the aforesaid cases, we are of the opinion that the expenditure that was incurred by the assessee before us for the construction of the stadium was of capital nature and, therefore, it has to be held that the lower authorities were justified in disallowing the assessee s claim for deduction of Rs. 5 lakhs as revenue expenditure. In this view of the matter, we uphold the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) on this point, as indicated above. 7. In the result, the appeal is dismissed
-
1983 (5) TMI 51 - ITAT CALCUTTA-A
Recognised Provident Fund ... ... ... ... ..... nistrative control of the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner. We are, accordingly, satisfied that the Board s Circular dated 30-11-1974 is not applicable in the assessee s case and even if it was applicable the provident fund of the assessee-company established in 1965 cannot be held to be a fund that did not come within the definition of section 2(38). In our opinion, the Commissioner was wrong in holding that the assessee s provident fund was not a recognised provident fund within the meaning of section 2(38). We, accordingly, set aside the Commissioner s order under section 263 and restore the order of the ITO for the assessment year 1976-77. 6. Since we have set aside the Commissioner s order, it is not necessary to deal with the alternative arguments advanced by the assessee s learned counsel, viz., that the contributions made by the assessee towards the employees provident fund should be allowed as a deduction under section 37. 7. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1983 (5) TMI 50 - ITAT CALCUTTA
Assessment Order ... ... ... ... ..... order along with notice of demand and another part of the order which contained determination of tax was not served on the assessee though it was made on 30-3-1978 within the period of limitation. Section 292B was introduced by the Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 1975 with effect from 1-10-1975 and the purpose of the section was that the assessment shall not be invalid merely by reason of any mistake, defect or omission. The assessment has been made under section 143(3)(a), but there is an omission that the tax determined by the ITO had not been forwarded to the assessee. In view of this specific provision, the assessment made by the ITO shall not be invalid merely on the ground that a part of the assessment order containing determination of tax was not forwarded to the assessee. It is only a curable defect and/or omission. Therefore, on facts it is held that the assessment made by the ITO on 30-3-1978 was a valid assessment. 19. In the result, the appeal is partially allowed.
-
1983 (5) TMI 49 - ITAT BOMBAY-D
Additional Tax, Income Tax, Industrial Company, Undistributed Profits ... ... ... ... ..... be made to the Bombay High Court decision in the case of CIT v. Smt. Godavaridevi Saraf 1978 113 ITR 589 wherein the learned judges have held that the Tribunal has to respect the law laid down by the High Court, though of a different State, so long as there is no contrary decision of any other High Court on the subject. In the circumstances, we are inclined to hold that, following the Calcutta High Court decision in the case of Bombay Photo Stores (P.) Ltd., the provisions of section 104 as amended by the Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 1975, which took effect from 1-4-1976, did not apply to the facts of the case. The question whether the provisions of section 104 applied to the assessee s case will have to be considered in the light of the law before its amendment, according to which the assessee and both the amalgamating companies being industrial companies, they were not exposed to the action under section 104. 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.
-
1983 (5) TMI 48 - ITAT BOMBAY-C
... ...
... ... ..... has not been controverted. Hence, we agree with the ld. representative for the assessee that the accommodation under consideration could not be regarded as Guest House for the purpose of s. 37 of the Act, on the authority of the decision of the Madras High Court in the case of Aruna Sugars Ltd. We find that the ITO has ignored the subsequent order dt. 18th December, 1975 of the Tribunal, which materially altered the earlier order of the Tribunal. Hence the original assessment orders might not be said to be erroneous. Be that as it may, after the decision of the Madras High Court in the case of Aruna Sugars Ltd., the CIT(A) could not have held that the accommodation under consideration was in the nature of a Guest House, so that he had no other alternative, but to cancel the orders u/s 54 of the Act, passed by the ITO. Under the circumstances, we uphold the orders of the CIT(A) for all the three years under consideration. 6. In the result, all the three appeals are dismissed.
....
|
