|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 201 to 220 of 375 Records
-
1995 (3) TMI 186 - ITAT PUNE
Assessing Officer, Assessment Proceedings, Penalty Proceedings, Reasonable Cause ... ... ... ... ..... lty proceedings were conducted on more than one occasion. The order was not passed in hurry or without taking into consideration the circumstances explained. In para 3 of the penalty order, the Dy. Commissioner in her own language had dealt with the explanation of the assessee and had considered the circumstances as not reasonable so as to warrant the borrowings in cash. During the course of penalty proceedings, the Dy. Commissioner had further asked for the statement regarding the availability of cash and the cash needs on the dates on which the offending cash borrowings were made. The learned CIT(A) was, therefore, justified in holding that there was no non-application of mind by the Dy. Commissioner so as to vitiate the penalty order passed by her. 11. In view of the discussion above, we hold that there is no infirmity legal or otherwise--in the impugned order of the learned CIT(A) so as to warrant our interference. This appeal is, thus, without any force and is dismissed.
-
1995 (3) TMI 185 - ITAT PUNE
Any Service, Assessing Officer, Bad Debt, Partnership Firm ... ... ... ... ..... o indicate the shamness of the transaction and lack of bona fides on the part of the parties to the agreement. We fail to understand as to what could be the possible gain to the assessee-company in entering into such arrangement with a firm consisting of such close relatives as partners. None of the three objects for which del credere agents are generally appointed in business world could be achieved out of the purported agency arrangement made in the present case. We, therefore, have no option but to concur with the learned CIT(A) that whole of this arrangement was sham one and the payment of the entire sum was unreasonable. Such payment can lawfully be disallowed both under section 37 as well as under section 40A(2). The learned CIT(A) was, therefore, justified in enhancing the income by disallowing this payment. This issue shall, therefore, stand decided against the assessee. 13. In view of the above discussion, we do not find any force in this appeal and dismiss the same.
-
1995 (3) TMI 184 - ITAT PUNE
Assessing Officer, Assessment Order, Income From Property, Mistake Apparent From Record, Original Assessment, Portuguese Civil Code
-
1995 (3) TMI 177 - ITAT MADRAS-B
Assessing Officer, Capital Receipt, Profit In Lieu, Profits In Lieu ... ... ... ... ..... e payment made to the assessee was in consideration of all the restrictive covenants undertaken by the assessee or in other words for loss of profits from business or profession in which the assessee could have profitably engaged himself. The various case laws relied upon by the learned counsel for the assessee also support the conclusion that the compensation received by the assessee was nothing but a capital receipt for loss of profit-earning source of income, and not loss of profits as such. in view of these facts and circumstances, it is to be held that the CIT (Appeals) is not justified in holding that the compensation fell within the mischief of section 17(3)(i) or (ii) as profits in lieu of salary ignoring the vital facts and the statutory provisions of the Company Law in this regard. Consequently, we set aside the order of the CIT (Appeals) and direct the Assessing Officer to exclude the compensation which is capital in nature. 8. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1995 (3) TMI 174 - ITAT JAIPUR
... ...
... ... ..... rs while levying interest under s. 216. The Board has also expressed similar view and imposed a duty on the AO to pass speaking orders under s. 216. 11. In the instant case, it is not disputed that the AO has not passed a speaking order, but has proceeded mechanically. On this ground itself the levy was rightfully struck down by the learned CIT(A) and we confirm the same. Since the interest levied is cancelled on legal grounds, going into the merits would not serve any purpose and hence we do not venture into it at all. The ground of the Department is accordingly rejected. 12. The last ground pertains to the allowance of depreciation on such costs of the assets as are reduced by the amount of subsidy received by the assessee. This ground is also dismissed in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. P.J. Chemicals Ltd. (1994) 121 CTR (SC) 201 (1994) 210 ITR 830 (SC) which was decided in favour of the assessee. 13. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.
-
1995 (3) TMI 173 - ITAT JAIPUR
... ...
... ... ..... be treated as an industrial company. 5. In the instant case the assembling activity carried out by the assessee is not disputed at all. The observation of the AO that each component utilised by the assessee is capable of being disposed of independently, is of no relevance. What is relevant is as to what the assessee did with those components mdash did he sell them off or assembled them to obtain a different product mdash and if once it is established that he has carried out the latter activity, it cannot be said that the assessee has done trading activity. 6. The fact that the assessee has done assembling activity, is confirmed by the learned CIT(A) and not disputed by the AO. If this fact is undisputable, then it also cannot be disputed that the assessee has earned more than 51 of its profit from such activity. The assessee, therefore, is entitled to be taxed at the rate applicable to industrial company and it is accordingly directed. 7. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed.
-
1995 (3) TMI 172 - ITAT JAIPUR
... ...
... ... ..... ch the same class of tax payers were likely to face. The charging provisions in the present case, are contained in s. 206 and the provisions contained in s. 272A(2) are purely procedural providing for the machinery for levying and collecting penalty. The amendment did not affect the very ingredient of the default contemplated by s. 206 or s. 206C. The proviso to s. 272A(2) though inserted w.e.f. 1st Oct., 1991 are, therefore, applicable to those cases of penalties also in which the proceedings are pending on that date. Appeal is simply continuation of the original proceedings. We, therefore, hold that the proviso to s. 272A(2) is applicable to the instant case. That being so, benefit of the proviso to s. 272A(2) is available to the appellant. 12. In view of the above discussion, we hold that the penalty under s. 272A(2)(c) was not leviable in the case of the appellant for either of the two years. The penalties levied are, therefore, cancelled and both the appeals are allowed.
-
1995 (3) TMI 169 - ITAT JAIPUR
... ...
... ... ..... es not deal with the liability which may arise because of failure of the assessee to pay such amount of advance tax as accords with his estimate of advance tax . That is also a point which we have highlighted at an earlier part of this order. Both these cases fully support our view point and, therefore, we hold that imposition of any penalty either under s. 273(2)(a) or 273(2)(b) in this case was not justified and has rightly been cancelled. 18. Before we close, we would like to add that since the AO specifically required the assessee to answer the default punishable under s. 273(2)(a) and had, thereafter, given him proper opportunity of being heard, before levying the penalty no irregularity in the proceedings was committed by him. The learned CIT(A) has taken a wrong view of the legal portion of the point. But in view of what has been discussed above, we uphold the order under appeal on merits of the case, though for other reasons. 19. In the result the appeal is dismissed.
-
1995 (3) TMI 167 - ITAT JAIPUR
Assessing Officer, Failure To Pay Advance Tax, False Estimate, Levy Of Penalty, Regular Assessment
-
1995 (3) TMI 166 - ITAT INDORE
... ...
... ... ..... 1976-77, 1977-78 and 1982-83 to 1984-85 and vide order, dt. 7th Oct., 1994 the Tribunal held that the value of the entire silver is to be included in the net wealth of the assessee. Following the same reasons, we reverse the order of the CWT(A) on the point and restore that of the AO. 17. The next objection is taken to the direction of the CWT(A) that only value of 57kgs. of bullion should be included in the net wealth of the assessee. It is the contention of the Revenue that the value of 66 kgs. of silver is also liable to be included is the net wealth of the assessee. 18. It is the accepted position that an identical point had come up for consideration before the Tribunal and vide order, dt. 7th Oct., 1994 the Tribunal had held that the value of 66 kgs. of silver is not to be included in the net wealth of the assessee. We see no reason to take a different view. We, accordingly, find no merit in this ground. 19. In the result, the appeals by the Revenue stand partly allowed.
-
1995 (3) TMI 165 - ITAT INDORE
... ...
... ... ..... visions contained in s. 80 of the Act. However, the Supreme Court in the case of Manmohandas has held that it is for the ITO dealing with the assessment in the subsequent year to determine whether the loss of the previous year may be set off against the profits of that year. The Hon ble Court also observed that a decision recorded by the ITO who computes the loss in the previous year under s. 24(3) of the 1922 Act that the loss cannot be set off against the income of the subsequent year is not binding on the assessee. In view of this principle it has to be held that the observations of the Assessing Officer that the loss will not be allowed to be carried forward would not be binding on the assessee and it would be open to the Assessing Officer dealing with the assessment in the subsequent year to determine whether the loss of the previous year may be set off against the profits of that year. 13. Subject to the above observations, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.
-
1995 (3) TMI 164 - ITAT HYDERABAD-B
Assessing Officer, Assessment Proceedings, Sales Tax Authorities ... ... ... ... ..... of Sri Thangavelu. The expenses related to legitimate business expenses. Therefore, they are allowable. The addition of Rs. 52,167 is, therefore, deleted. The learned DR relied on the orders of the Assessing Officer and the learned AR of the assessee relied on the orders of the CIT(Appeals). 22. We have considered the submissions and inclined to agree with the submissions made by the learned DR. From the order of the CIT(Appeals), it is evident that he has deleted the addition purely on surmises and conjectures which has no place on income-tax proceedings. The nature of expenses have not even filed before us. Sri Thangavelu is an employee of the assessee and therefore there is no question of again making payment to him and in the absence of any details and the nature of expenses, we hold that the disallowance is justified and accordingly the same is upheld and the CIT(Appeals) s findings are reversed on this issue. 23. In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is allowed
-
1995 (3) TMI 163 - ITAT HYDERABAD
Assessing Officer, Cash Basis, Profit On Sale, Regular Assessment ... ... ... ... ..... 41,24,150 cannot be termed as a prima facie adjustment and in any event the Assessing Officer could not have made the same in an intimation under section 143(1)(a) in the light of the circulars of the Board and the decisions of various High Courts and the Tribunal discussed above, since the admissibility or otherwise of the assessee s claim in that behalf is a debatable one, on which two opinions are possible. In this view of the matter, we set aside the order of the CIT(A), and cancelling the intimation under section 143(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, sent by the Assessing Officer on 18-6-1993, and direct him to complete regular assessment under section 143(3) after issuing due notice to the assessee under section 143(2) and after making due enquiries with regard to admissibility or otherwise of the assessee s claim for deduction of profit of Rs. 41,24,150 from the Net Profit as per Profit and Loss Account. 11. In the result, the assessee s appeal is treated as allowed.
-
1995 (3) TMI 162 - ITAT HYDERABAD
Expenditure Incurred ... ... ... ... ..... our opinion, it was rightly applied particularly in the light of the decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court inthe case of M. Krishna Murthy. 12. It may further be stated that the present case is not a case of payment by way of reimbursement to the assessee of medical expenditure incurred by the employee but a case where the expenditure was met directly by the employer as stated by the assessee in his communication dated 13-7-1987, to quote him, the dealings were between the company and Hospital. 13. We accordingly restore the addition of Rs 2,54,244 in assessment year 1984-85 and Rs. 54,067 in assessment year 1985-86 which represented the medical expenses on the assessee incurred by the employer. The addition of the other amounts spent on Sri G.S. Raju was rightly deleted by the CIT (Appeals) as the same cannot be a perquisite in the hands of the assessee, the payment being not in respect of any obligation of the assessee. 14. In the result, the appeals are partly allowed.
-
1995 (3) TMI 161 - ITAT DELHI-E
... ...
... ... ..... enefit the business of the assessee or facilitate the carrying on the assessee s business. A man s business may be beneficial in a number of ways. One of them may be the promoting of good business relations with those whom he has to deal with during the course of the business CIT vs. A. Tellery and Sons (P) Ltd. (1972) Tax LR 581 (All) . The CIT(A) comparing the rate of commission in the earlier assessment years termed it as arbitrary. But he has not taken into consideration the agreement between LCMC and Bombay Dyeing Mills to see at what rate LCMC agreed to bear the expenditure of advertisement with Bombay Dyeing Mills in the earlier years. The CIT(A) ought to have seen the rate at which LCMC agreed to share expenditure with Bombay Dyeing Mills in the earlier years. In these facts and circumstances of the case, we hold that the lower authorities are not at all justified in disallowing the assessee s claim for deduction of Rs. 25,438. 8. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1995 (3) TMI 160 - ITAT DELHI-E
Assessment Year, Sales Tax ... ... ... ... ..... not a penalty, for which provision has been separately made by section 3 (5). Nor is it a penalty with the meaning of section 4, which provides for a criminal liability and a criminal prosecution. The penalty payable under section 3(5) lies in the discretion of the collecting officer or authority. In the case of the penalty under section 4, no prosecution can be instituted unless, under section 5(1), a complaint is made by under the authority of the Cane Commissioner or the District Magistrate. In truth, the interest provided for under section 3(3) is in the nature of compensation paid to the Govt. for delay in the payment of cess . 7. Thus on examination of the statutory provisions of section 9(2) of the Central Sales-tax Act, we are of the considered view that the interest claimed at Rs. 1,21,857 is compensatory in nature and is hence allowable as a deduction under section 37(1) of the Act. The penalty however is not allowable. 8. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed
-
1995 (3) TMI 159 - ITAT DELHI-D
... ...
... ... ..... d Departmental Representative supported the orders of the authorities below. 10.1 We have heard the learned representatives and have also perused the relevant record. The business carried on by the assessee consists exclusively of the export out ofIndiaand, therefore, deduction under s. 80HHC is governed in accordance with the provisions of sub-cl. (a) of sub-s. (3) of s. 80HHC, which defines profits derived from the export of goods out ofIndiafor the purposes of deduction under sub-s. (1). We, therefore, find merit in the submission made by the learned authorised representative for the assessee and the claim made by the assessee is also in accordance with the order of the Special Bench of the Tribunal. Respectfully following the Special Bench order we direct recomputation of deduction under s. 80HHC, for which the Assessing Officer may, if necessary, give an opportunity of being heard to the assessee also. 11. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part, as indicated above.
-
1995 (3) TMI 158 - ITAT DELHI-B
Assessing Officer, Assessment Year, Guest House, High Court ... ... ... ... ..... f Upper Ganges Sugar Mills Ltd has upheld the disallowance of depreciation on guest house. Similarly, the Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of Ocean Carriers (P.) Ltd. has held that the assessee-company was not entitled to allowance under section 37(4) in respect of any expenditure on maintenance of guest house nor to depreciation allowance. The ITAT Delhi Bench E also in ITA Nos. 3163 and 3227/89 has upheld the disallowance of rent and depreciation on guest house. 10.1 Thus, it is evident that the two reasonable interpretations of the provision of section 37(4) are possible. Now, it is a settled law that when the two interpretations of a provision are possible, the interpretation favourable to the assessee should be adopted. Accordingly, we adopt the view which is favourable to the assessee. Therefore, we direct that the rent paid on the guest house amounting to Rs. 1,76,000 be allowed. Accordingly, ground No. 4 is allowed. 11. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed
-
1995 (3) TMI 157 - ITAT DELHI-A
... ...
... ... ..... having regard to ss. 220(6) and 225 since the nature of the order passed was unconditional, in our opinion, the orders when once passed cannot be reviewed. Therefore, we hold that the subsequent order dt. 12/13th Dec., 1994 is without jurisdiction and beyond the powers of the AO. 11. In view of what we consider about the legal position we hold that the orders dt.24th March, 1993, should be deemed to be continuing. 12. Even otherwise, since this Tribunal itself is having inherent powers of stay in appropriate cases, we feel that after surveying the facts of the case and the contentions on either side, the balance of convenience lay very much on the side of the assessee. The balance of inconvenience in refusing stay to the assessee would be much more than the inconvenience to the Department by grant of stay. Therefore, we hold that there will be a grant of stay of collection of tax till the disposal of the second appeal before this Tribunal. The petition is accordingly allowed.
-
1995 (3) TMI 156 - ITAT DELHI
Assessing Officer, Attributable To, Deduction In Respect, Expenditure Incurred, Industrial Undertaking, Sales Promotion, Sales Tax, Setting Up, Trading Receipt
............
|
