Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 121 to 140 of 216 Records
-
1988 (9) TMI 98 - ITAT HYDERABAD-B
Assessment Year, Delay In Filing Return, High Court, Late Filing, Reasonable Cause ... ... ... ... ..... assessment years under consideration as HUF. Further as the assessee s wife Smt. B. Saroja Devi did possess taxable wealth for the two assessment years under consideration, I direct the Wealth-tax Officer to apply the rates of wealth-tax appropriate to a HUF having at least one member who has taxable wealth. Therefore, it is seen that the learned CWT himself did not feel any difficulty to treat the status of the assessee in a different way than the status of the assessee in a different way than the status disclosed in the wealth-tax returns. So, applying the same logic for these seven assessment years also nothing prevented the department to take the correct status and complete the assessments. Therefore, ultimately we find that there was turns and hence it is not a fit case where penalties should be sustained, either sec. 271(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act or under sec. 18(1)(a) of the Wealth-tax Act. 6. Hence, we cancel all the penalties for these 7 years and allow the appeal.
-
1988 (9) TMI 97 - ITAT GAUHATI
... ... ... ... ..... f CIT vs. Yodh Raj Bhalla (1953) 23 ITR 371 (Punj). Thus, it is our considered opinion that a mere irregularity or error in a procedure or in the form should not be allowed to defeat justice. In fact, the Hon ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Chaturbhuji Radhakishan (1985) 156 ITR 527 (Raj) (SC) on the facts of that case has held that provision relating to appeals should be construed liberally. 11. In view of what we have discussed above, the defect in the memorandum of appeal in the present case is a curable defect. It is not of the Assistant Registrar do intimate the appellant concerned to have such defect removed. The appellant concerned may remove the defect within 30 days time of receipt of the order, failing which the appeal will be disposed of as it is. If the defect is removed within the period specified, the appeal would be listed for hearing in due course. 12. Thus, the preliminary points raised by the learned counsel for the assessees are disposed of as such.
-
1988 (9) TMI 96 - ITAT DELHI-D
... ... ... ... ..... sion, we are of the opinion that it was not clearly established that the cost of construction of the building in question as declared by the assessee was incorrect or that any larger amount had been spend on its construction. We also hold that the cost of construction as reported by the valuation Officer or as determined by the learned IAC(A) were unacceptable in the face of sufficient and better evidence to the contrary. Therefore, the addition of Rs. 17,65,790 was unjustified and is hereby deleted. 12. The next ground raised in this appeal is about a disallowance of Rs. 5,000 out of electricity expenses. This was not pressed before us and is accordingly rejected. 13. The last contention raised in this appeal is about the levy of interest under s. 139(8) and 215 of the Act. This is merely consequential and the ITO will have to see whether after the modification of the income, as ordered above, any interest is still charged. 14. In the result, the appeal stand partly allowed.
-
1988 (9) TMI 95 - ITAT DELHI-D
... ... ... ... ..... of the payments having been established, we hold that these payments were saved by r. 6DD(j)(ii) as well. 12. For the reasons discussed above, the disallowance of expenditure on purchases amounting to Rs. 9,56,751 was unjustified and we, therefore, delete the same. 13. The next contention raised in this appeal is about the upholding of an addition of Rs. 2,849 under s. 40A(8) of the Act. This was not pressed before us and is accordingly rejected. 14. One of the contentions raised is about the assessee s claim under s. 80J of the Act. This become redundant and infructuous because as a result of the allowance of the aforesaid expenditure on purchases there will be no income in this case. The same is the fate of Ground No. 8 relating to charge of interest under s. 139(8) and 217 of the Act. 15. In the result, the assessee s appeal is partly allowed and the addition of Rs. 9,57,751 made by the ITO is hereby deleted. The levy of interest under s. 139(8) and 217 is also cancelled.
-
1988 (9) TMI 94 - ITAT DELHI-D
Assessment Year, Closing Stock, Revised Return, Voluntary Disclosure Of Income And Wealth Ordinance
-
1988 (9) TMI 93 - ITAT DELHI-B
... ... ... ... ..... im for their past services on termination of their employment, the expenditure cannot be but wholly and exclusively incurred for the purposes of business. Just think what would have happened if all the employees had immediately stopped work and gone to a Court or to the mercantile association for payment of their dues. The entire business and goodwill of the assessee would have been destroyed in no time. The fact that the firm continued even after the death of Shri Gurandawayamal or that the employees also continued for some time, in now way adversely affects the genuineness of the expenditure in question. They rather show that this expenditure was incurred as there was a desire to continue the business and avoid ill effects of happening that might take place if the employees put their threats into action. We are, therefore, of the view that the learned AAC was right in allowing the expenditure in question and consequently this appeal has to be dismissed. 8. Appeal dismissed.
-
1988 (9) TMI 92 - ITAT DELHI-A
... ... ... ... ..... are not available to him, it may not be possible for him to take any action under s. 263. In this case the Commissioner does not say that he has examined the records whether original or re-constructed and this omission on his part also vitiates the order. 13. As already stated it was asserted on behalf of the Commissioner that the assessment was made in undue haste and hurry. Though some haste is apparent from the fact that the return was fled on10th May, 1985and the assessment was completed on18th May, 1985but the Commissioner in his order has nowhere found that the ITO acted in undue haste or hurry. The word undue is important. Every assessment made quickly after the receipt of the return cannot by itself be said to have been made in undue haste and hurry. 14. For the reasons discussed above, we find that the Commissioner s action in cancelling the assessment under s. 263 is not sustainable and we, therefore, cancel the same. The assessee s appeal therefore, stands allowed.
-
1988 (9) TMI 91 - ITAT DELHI-A
... ... ... ... ..... ar. What inference should be drawn from given facts would always depend on the facts of he given case and it would not be correct for us even to speculate at this stage as to what remedy could be available to the assessee in a situation where the ITO refused or omitted to do what his duty was. In the present case, we find that it would not be correct to hold that the return filed for asst. yr. 1983-84 was left unnoticed or untouched by the ITO. When three items out of four which constituted the totality of the minus income were noted by the ITO and carried forward, the fourth item should also have been carried forward by him, for the law with regard to it s. 80 notwithstanding, was no different from what the law was with regard in the unabsorbed depreciation, unabsorbed investment allowance, unabsorbed s. 80J(3) relief. With these observations we accept the assessee s appeal, and direct the ITO to carry forward the loss of Rs. 3,05,190 as per the return for asst. yr. 1983-84.
-
1988 (9) TMI 90 - ITAT DELHI-A
Assessment Year, Benefit Or Perquisite Arising From Business, Foreign Company, Indian Company
-
1988 (9) TMI 89 - ITAT DELHI-A
A Firm, Assessment Year, Development Rebate Reserve, Dissolved Firm, Two Partners ... ... ... ... ..... d where the amounts relating to the development rebate reserve had gone if they were not utilised for the purposes of business. If the amount is debited to the Profit and Loss Account and credited to a reserve account, the amount involved therein could continues to be utilised in business and, therefore, it was for the ITO to show that this was not so and in fact the assessee withdrew the amounts relating to development rebate reserve from its business and used them for some other purpose. This does not appear to have been the case in respect of the firm in question. Section 155(5)(ii) cannot come into play when the assessee ceased to exist as in the case before us by dissolution of a firm or by the death of an individual assessee. Therefore, the ITO s action in withdrawing the development rebate for the alleged non-user of the development rebate reserve was also misconceived and not sustainable. 10. In the result, we find no force in these appeals and the same are dismissed.
-
1988 (9) TMI 88 - ITAT DELHI
... ... ... ... ..... not specified where the amounts relating to the development rebate reserve had gone if they were not utilised for the purposes of business. If the amount is debited to the P and L Account and credited to a reserve account, the amount involved therein could continue to be utilised in business and, therefore, it was for the ITO to show that this was not so and in fact the assessee withdrew the amount relating to development rebate reserve from its business and used them for some other purpose. This does not appear to have been the case in respect of the firm in question. Sec. 155(5)(ii) cannot come into play when the assessee ceased to exist as in the case before us by dissolution of a firm or by the death of an individual assessee. Therefore, the ITO s action in withdrawing the development rebate for the alleged non-user of the development rebate reserve was also misconceived and not sustainable. 10. In the result, we find no force in these appeals and the same are dismissed.
-
1988 (9) TMI 87 - ITAT COCHIN
Assessment Year, His Net Wealth, Household Articles, Purchase Tax, Sales Tax ... ... ... ... ..... i), WT Act. The authorities below had rightly held it to be a taxable asset. 14. The last ground relates to industrial subsidy received by the assessee which the authorities below have included in the net wealth. This very issue had been considered by the Tribunal in the case of the assessee for the assessment year 1978-79 in WTA No. 98/Coch/84. The fact situation is admittedly the same. Following the reasons given by the Tribunal in the earlier order for 1978-79, we reject the claim of the assessee and uphold the finding of the CWT (A) in this regard 15. The grounds raised by the revenue in its appeals stand considered by the discussion made by us in paragraphs 8 to 14. Similarly the grounds raised in the cross-objections also stand disposed of while considering the substantive appeals filed by the assessee. 16. In the result, the appeals by the assessee are dismissed. The appeals by the revenue are allowed. The related cross-objections, filed by the assessee, are dismissed.
-
1988 (9) TMI 86 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ... ... ... ..... de by the assessee will not disentitle him from claiming that he denies his liability to be assessed to interest. If the interest is levied and the assessee has remedy under the IT Rules, he is entitled to avail of that remedy also in addition to his denial to be assessed to such liability. When two channels are open to him for redressal of the grievance, he may avail of the both or either of them. The application for waiver or reduction of interest by itself will not establish that there is no case for denial of liability at all to the levy of interest. 14. Since we have restored the issued regarding assessment to be made de novo to the file of the ITO, we are of the opinion that registration should also be considered afresh after giving opportunity to the assessee and also verifying the claim of the assessee that Form No. 11 was filed with the ITO on 31st March, 1980 registered at Sl. No. 6368 of his register. We order accordingly. 15. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1988 (9) TMI 85 - ITAT BOMBAY-E
... ... ... ... ..... rd rival submissions and considered the material on record. The facts stated by Shri Patil are not in dispute that excess tax was due to be refunded to the assessee of Rs. 19,034. The assessee made requests to the ITO by her various letters to refund the excess amount of tax paid by the assessee, but the ITO has not refunded the same before filing the wealth-tax return. Refund due to the assessee was Rs. 19,034 and wealth-tax payable for the year 1980-81 was Rs. 18,196 which is less than the refund due. In our view, the ITO inspite of specific request of the assessee has not refunded the excess tax which could have been paid alongwith the wealth-tax return. Therefore, there appears to be a reasonable cause on the part of the assessee for not paying the wealth-tax and in our view there is no cause for penalty under s. 15B of the Act. Therefore, the penalty levied and confirmed by the lower authorities is hereby cancelled. 7. In the result, assessee s appeal is hereby allowed.
-
1988 (9) TMI 84 - ITAT BOMBAY-E
... ... ... ... ..... issue to the Valuation Officer of the Department if he intends to reject the valuation as the case squarely falls within the provisions of sec. 16A of the WT Act. Since the WTO assumed proper jurisdiction and failure to refer the mater to the Valuation Officer is only procedural mistake, we set aside the order on this issue and restore the matter to his file with a direction that he will redecide the issue in accordance with law. In doing so, he shall give reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Following the view taken by the Tribunal, on similar issue, in para 6 above, we set aside the order of the authorities below on this issue and direct the WTO, if the WTO intends to reject the value shown by the assessee of these annuity policies, he should refer the matter to the Valuation Cell and redecide the issue on the basis of the Valuation Report. Accordingly, the matter is restored back to the WTO. 4. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed.
-
1988 (9) TMI 83 - ITAT BOMBAY-E
... ... ... ... ..... vested. Thus the decision of the Bombay High Court supports the view which we have taken. We further find that the said decision of the Bombay High Court was followed in CIT vs. T. Ponnaiah (1988) 69 CTR (AP) 150 (1988) 172 ITR 269 (Bom) where the Andhra Pradesh High Court was concerned with the interpretation of identical words viz. Immediate or deferred benefit of his minor child in s. 64(1)(vii) of the IT Act, 1961. Similar view has been taken by the Karnataka High Court in CIT vs. H.H. Yeshwant Rao Ghorpade (1978) 115 ITR 232 (Kar), where the identical words in s. 4(1)(a)(iii) of the WT Act, 1957, had come up for consideration. We respectfully follow these decisions and hold that the amount settled by the Trust Deed in question by the assessee does not attract the provisions of s. 4(1)(a)(vi) of the WT Act, 1957 and as such the said amount was not liable to be included in the net wealth of the assessee. We direct the WTO to exclude that amount. 9. The appeal is allowed.
-
1988 (9) TMI 82 - ITAT BOMBAY-E
... ... ... ... ..... ger life than anticipated. The estimated income may be taken at Rs. 15,000 though the average income is Rs. 13,330. Taking the expected life of three years and rate for capitalisation at 12 per cent, the years purchase is Rs. 2,402. The capitalised value is Rs. 15,000 x 2,402 or Rs. 36,030. 8. The above would be the best and most comparable example for valuing the royalty and we adopt the same in the case of this assessee also. The multiple to be adopted as such has to be 2.402 and the valuation shall be worked out in tune with the above quoted work-out/example. 9. The orders of learned lower authorities shall stand modified since the work-out has to be in accordance with the above quoted example. They are directed to revise the work-out and adopt it accordingly. 10. For statistics, the Revenue succeeds partially, since on the issue of annuity we have remanded back the matter. The assessee s appeals shall be deemed to have succeeded partly on merits and party for statistics.
-
1988 (9) TMI 81 - ITAT BOMBAY-E
Assessment Year, Gift Tax, Net Wealth, Wealth Tax ... ... ... ... ..... longer life than anticipated. The estimated income may be taken at Rs.15,000 though the average income is Rs.13,330. Taking the expected life of three years and rate for capitalisation at 12 per cent, the years purchase is Rs. 2,402. The capitalised value is Rs. 15,000, 2.402 or Rs. 36,030. 8. The above would be the best and most comparable example for valuing the royalty and we adopt the same in the case of this assessee also. The multiple to be adopted as such has to be 2.402 and the valuation shall be worked out in tune with the above quoted work out/example. 9. The orders of learned lower authorities shall stand modified since the work out has to be in accordance with the above quoted example. They are directed to revise the work out and adopt it accordingly. 10. For statistics, the Revenue succeeds partially, since on the issue of annuity we have remanded back the matter. The assessee s appeals shall be deemed to have succeeded partly on merits and partly for statistics.
-
1988 (9) TMI 80 - ITAT BOMBAY-C
... ... ... ... ..... as follows The CIT(A) erred in disallowing the expenditure of Rs. 4,182 on the transit house, wrongly treating it as a guest house. This house is kept for the officers and other employees of the company to stay in while they go to Calcutta for their office work for the business of the company. This transit house cannot be treated as a guest house even within the meaning of s. 37(5) of the IT Act. In any event the CIT(A) wrongly estimated the expenses at Rs. 15,000. 16. We find that point in controversy is covered against the assessee by the decision of the Tribunal for earlier years referred to above. The submission that the CIT(A) wrongly estimated the expenses at Rs. 15,000 is also not acceptable. The disallowance has been rightly made in view of the provisions in sub-s. (4) r/w sub-s. (5) of s. 37. The accommodation in question was rightly treated as accommodation in the nature of guest house. We confirm the disallowance and reject this ground. 17. The appeal is dismissed.
-
1988 (9) TMI 79 - ITAT BOMBAY-A
... ... ... ... ..... essee was not in a position to produce any evidence to show that there have been some developments during the previous year which went to indicate that the amounts in fact had become bad and irrecoverable during the year under consideration. In the result, this ground of appeal is upheld. 29. The next ground of appeal which relates to all the 3 years 1978-79 to 1980-81 is against taxing of credit balances written back to the Profit and Loss Account. The amounts involved are very inconsequential. There is no finding by the ITO or for that matter the CIT(A), that the liability in regard to the amounts written back have ceased to exist or there was a remission by the parties to whom the amounts were owed. In the circumstances, the inclusion of these amounts in the total income cannot be justified and the same are, therefore, deleted. 30. In the result, the appeals for asst. yrs. 1970-71, 1971-72 are allowed and those for the other 3 years 1978-79 to 1980-81 are allowed in part.
....
|