|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 201 to 220 of 865 Records
-
2012 (5) TMI 670 - ITAT HYDERABAD
Addition made on account of extra consideration received by the assessee - Held that:- We are of the opinion that estimation of 25% of the undisclosed turnover at ₹ 250 per sq. ft. be treated as undisclosed income of the assessee instead of ₹ 100 per sft being the net profit out of the on-money of ₹ 250 per sft., considered by the CIT(A). In other words, Income of the assessee to be considered as ₹ 62.50 per sft being the net profit out of the on-money receipt of ₹ 250 per sft. Thus the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and assessee’s appeals are partly allowed.
Earning on sale of the land - nature of land - Held that:- Even if the land was developed and was sold after converting into plots with a view to secure the better price it cannot come within the purview of adventure in the nature of trade and business. Further, it is admitted fact that the land in dispute herein is an agricultural land and assessed to land revenue. The earning on sale of the land was in the nature of capital gain and therefore, not assessable as income from business. Accordingly, we are entirely agreement with the findings given by the CIT(A) in his order and the same is confirmed. The grounds raised by the revenue are rejected.
Not giving credit to the balance of cash available in his capacity as the Karta of HUF as on the opening day of the financial year - Held that:- In this case, the assessee filed the return of income on 21.2.2008 and disclosed the entire investment in purchase of agricultural property. The assessee had 50% share in the land. Since the entire investment is disclosed in the return of income filed before the date of search, there is no question of treating the same as undisclosed income in the absence of any evidence to the contrary. More so, due credit has to be given towards opening cash balance available with assessee in his individual capacity as well as HUF as the fund is available for investment in land. Accordingly, this ground is allowed.
Addition u/s 40A - Held that:- Since we have already held elsewhere in this order that the land in dispute is an agricultural land and the provisions of section 40A(3) are not applicable being it is covered by the exception provided in Rule 6DD of the IT Rules. Accordingly, we do not find infirmity in the action of the CIT(A) on this issue. The order of the CIT(A) is confirmed on this issue.
-
2012 (5) TMI 669 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... trix of the case, reveal that the AO, has failed to bring on record cogent and relevant material to prove the transactions of shares as bogus. The impugned transactions of shares were transferred through Deduction-mat account of the appellant, which would show that the shares were actually possessed by the assessee. The surrounding circumstances must be strong enough to establish that the impugned transactions were not genuine. However, in the present case, no such evidence has been brought on record by the revenue to prove such transactions of shares as bogus. The CIT(A), has discussed the matter in detail and gave detailed findings thereon. We do not find any infirmity in the order of the CIT(A), and, hence, the same are upheld. The ground of appeal of the revenue is dismissed. 10. Ground Nos. 2 & 3 are general in nature and, hence, need no separate adjudication. 11. In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 17th May 2012.
-
2012 (5) TMI 668 - ITAT DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... . Accordingly, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the CIT(A) confirming the addition of ₹ 40,000/-. 23. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. 24. Now, coming to the ground of appeal raised by the Revenue. The only issue for consideration relates to the deletion of addition made by the AO on account of long term capital gains in respect of shares of M/s. Rajdhani Securities Ltd. Since we have set aside the issue to the file of the assessing officer to examine sale of shares of Rajdhani Securities Ltd. afresh the appeal filed by Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes. 25. In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes. ITA Nos.1872 & 2861/Del/2004 26. To sum appeal, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and that of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes. 27. This decision is pronounced in the Open Court on 18th May, 2012.
-
2012 (5) TMI 667 - ITAT INDORE
... ...
... ... ..... s account. It was explained by the assessee that amount was received on sale of land for which Power of Attorney was given by his brother Shri Rais Ahmed. In the sale deed executed in favour of Anis Ahmed, it was found that the assessee has signed both as buyer and as seller in the capacity of Power of Attorney holder. However, the assessee could not substantiate its claim that amount was given by his brother Rais Ahmed in clearance of some of its past dues. It appears that without cross examining Shri Rais Ahmed with regard to payment of amount to assessee for clearance of dues, the Assessing Officer reached to adverse inference. In the interest of justice, we restore back this issue to the file of Assessing Officer and assessee is directed to substantiate its claim for deposit in the Bank account. We direct accordingly. 10. In the result, both the appeals are allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove. This order has been pronounced in the open court on 7th May , 2012.
-
2012 (5) TMI 666 - ITAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... e purpose of computation of income u/s.80HHC, is allowed by following the view taken in the A.Y. 2002-03. 33. Next ground is about the disallowance of interest to the sister concern is dismissed in consonance with the view taken earlier. 34. The only other issue in this appeal is against the deletion of addition of foreign travel expenses. The facts of this ground are that the assessee incurred foreign travelling expenses to the tune of .23.50 lakh. The A.O. disallowed a sum of .3 lakh for the reason that the journeys undertaken were not in connection with the business. The learned CIT(A) deleted the addition by observing that all the places visited by the assessee were in connection with the business. No material has been brought on record to controvert this finding of the learned CIT(A). We, therefore, uphold the impugned order to this extent. This ground is not allowed. 35. In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed. Order pronounced on this 23rd day of May, 2012.
-
2012 (5) TMI 665 - ITAT MUMBAI
Levying tax @ 48% applicable to non-resident companies as against levy of tax @ 35% to Indian companies - issue is covered against the assessee by orders of the Tribunal(supra) in assessee’s own case, we confirm the action of authorities below by rejecting ground No.1 of appeal taken by the assessee.
Disallow foreign exchange loss on outstanding foreign exchange transactions considering the same as notional loss and not the actual loss to the assessee - Held that:- Increase depreciation are allowable on additional liability arising out of fluctuation in rate of exchange and “actual payment" was not a condition precedent for making necessary adjustment in the carrying cost of the fixed asset acquired in foreign currency. In view of above, we allow ground No.2 of appeal in favour of the assessee
TDS liability - Interest charged by head office and overseas offices to its Indian offices - chargeable to tax in India - Having held that the interest paid by the Indian branch of the assessee Bank to its head office and other branches outside India is not chargeable to tax in India, it follows that the provisions of section 195 would not be attracted and there being no failure to deduct tax at source from the said payment of interest made by the PE, the question of disallowance of the said interest by invoking the provisions of section 40(a)(i) does not arise.
Addition u/s 14A - Held that:- We agree with ld CIT(A) that AO has not proved that investment in shares has been made by the assessee out of interest bearing funds but on the other hands sufficient funds to finance the shares is available with assessee. However, we do not agree with ld A.R. that there was no administrative cost incurred by the assessee for maintaining portfolio of the shares against which assessee has received dividend income of ₹ 13,11,750 which is exempted u/s.10(33) of the Act. We consider it prudent to estimate ₹ 25,000 as cost on account of administrative expenses towards maintaining shares portfolio by the assessee to earn dividend income which is exempted from income tax. Hence, we restrict the disallowance under section 14A of the Act to ₹ 25,000 by modifying the orders of authorities below. Ground No.1 is allowed in part.
Addition of liabilities towards long outstanding DD/cheques - Held that:- Provisions of section 41(1) of the Act will be applicable only when assessee has obtained, whether in cash or in other manner whatsoever an amount in respect of such loss or expenditure or some benefit in respect of such trading liability by way of remission or cessation thereof, the amount obtained by him. Since in the case before us, assessee has not obtained any benefit and the liability is outstanding, we agree that the provisions of section 41(1) of the Act does not attract.
Tax deducted at source in accordance with the Korean laws is also part of assessee’s total income for the assessment year under consideration - Held that:- Decided in favour of revenue
-
2012 (5) TMI 664 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
Grant of registration u/s 12A rejected - Held that:- We find no merit in the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax in observation that no charitable activity had been undertaken during the financial year 2007-08 and in the subsequent years which is contrary to the finding of Tribunal in para 7 of the order dated 30.7.2010. The order of the Commissioner of Income Tax in rejecting the registration to the assessee while giving effect to the order of the Tribunal under section 12AA r.w.s. 254 of the Act merits to be dismissed for the above said lapses. The assessee having fulfilled the conditions for grant of registration under section 12A of the Act, we hold the assessee entitled to the registration of the trust for carrying out the charitable activities of imparting education. The Commissioner of Income Tax is directed to pass consequential granting registration under section 12AA of the Act to the assessee. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are thus allowed.
-
2012 (5) TMI 663 - ITAT CHENNAI
Denying the deduction in respect of depreciation while computing income of the assessee in terms of section 11 - Held that:- We set aside the order of the lower authorities and direct the Assessing Officer to allow the claim of depreciation to the assessee. Thus, the grounds of appeal of the assessee are allowed.
-
2012 (5) TMI 662 - ITAT CHENNAI
Allowable software expenses - Held that:- It is clear that the assessee has spent the amounts for running its software system and not for acquiring any new system. Consumables and others were purchased for servicing the existing net work. This is the same which goes with the servicing as well. Another item is internet charges and small expenditure expended on training. The major amount is spent for IT help desk. It is to be seen that none of these expenses was incurred for acquiring any new system or facility of enduring nature. By the nature of the expenditure itself, it is clear on the face of the records that the expenses incurred were in the nature of revenue expenditure. Therefore, we find that the AO has rightly allowed the claim of the assessee. As such, the finding of the Commissioner, is untenable. Accordingly, the revision order is set aside. - Assessee is allowed.
-
2012 (5) TMI 661 - ITAT HYDERABAD
... ...
... ... ..... a-fide belief that division of the contract receipts at source between the members of the JV, would not constitute payments to sub-contractors. Hence, the decision of the co ordinate bench is inapplicable considering the facts of the case before us. 15. We are of the opinion that when the contractor companies, who are big tax payers, regularly effect TDS on all payments made by them to various sub-contractors, there could be no reason why they should effect TDS unless on a bona-fide belief that TDS was not required to be made. We are of the view that the difference in perception of the provisions of law based on the opinion of practicing Chartered Accountant led to the bona-fide belief for non-payment of TDS and hence the conduct of the assessee does not appear to be contumacious for the levy of penalty u/s 271C of the Act. Thus, the penalty imposed u/s 271C is hereby deleted. 16. In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed. Pronounced in the open court on 04/05/2012.
-
2012 (5) TMI 660 - ITAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... me, it cannot be said that there is no possibility to claim such amount as a business loss. In other words, it is a case of debatable issue on which two views are possible. It is settled legal position that penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) cannot be imposed on a debatable issue. Moreover, since the assessee made complete disclosure of the details in this regard in its return of income, in our considered opinion the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Petroproducts (P) Ltd. (2010) 322 ITR 158 (SC) will come to the assessee’s rescue, in which it has been held that mere making of a claim which is not sustainable in law, by itself, will not attract penalty under this section. Considering the entirety of facts and circumstances prevailing in the instant case, we are of the considered opinion that the ld. CIT(A) was justified in ordering the deletion of penalty. We, therefore, uphold the impugned order. 4. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.
-
2012 (5) TMI 659 - ITAT HYDERABAD
... ...
... ... ..... e matter, when the date of receipt of the assessment order, as claimed by the assessee is accepted, the appeal filed by the assessee before the CIT(A) on 7.6.2004, has to be treated as having been filed within time, since 5th and 6th June, 2004 happen to be closed holidays, being Saturday and Sunday respectively. We therefore, hold that the CIT(A) is not justified in concluding that the appeal was filed belatedly and on that account dismissing the appeal of the assessee without going into the merits thereof. Accordingly, impugned order of the CIT(A) is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the CIT(A) with a direction to admit the appeal before him, as having been filed within time, and dispose off the same afresh on merits of the grounds raised therein, in accordance with law and after giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Court on 31.5.2012
-
2012 (5) TMI 658 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Additions on account of unaccounted cash and on account of interest - Held that:- Before us the Revenue has not filed copy of the documents relied upon by the Assessing Officer. Learned counsel for the Revenue submitted that he had asked for the original file/documents, but the same could not be traced out. Statement of Navneet Jhamb has also not been filed. In these circumstances, we do not think that we can examine and go into the question of perversity as alleged and propounded by the counsel for the Revenue. The appeal is accordingly dismissed with no costs.
-
2012 (5) TMI 657 - CESTAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... sold at or about the same, at the time nearest to the time of removal of goods under assessment. 3. Only contention of the applicant is that some of the goods are sold to independent wholesale buyers at the factory gate and some goods are cleared to depot from where the goods were sold. Hence, the sale from the depot is not to be taken into consideration and Rule 7 of the valuation Rules is not applicable in this case. 4. We find that as the appellants had cleared the goods from the factory gate as well as from the depot. Therefore, prima facie in view of the provisions of Rules 7, the applicant has not made out a case for total waiver. Hence, the applicants are directed to deposit ₹ 40,000/- within a period six weeks. On deposit of the amount, pre-deposit of the balance amount of duty, interest and penalty shall remain waived and recovery thereof stayed during pendency of the appeal. 5. Compliance is to be reported on 30.7.2012. (Dictated and pronounced in open Court)
-
2012 (5) TMI 656 - ITAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... section for determining as to whether the remuneration to directors was excessive or reasonable. Proceeding accordingly, he made disallowance u/s.40A(2)(b) to the tune of ₹ 7,43,518/-. The ld. CIT(A) got convinced with the assessee’s stand and ordered for the deletion of addition. 10. After considering the rival submissions and perusing the relevant material on record, it is seen that the AO has computed disallowance u/s.40A(2)(b) towards remuneration to director by relying on sec. 198 of the Companies Act, which he himself found to be not applicable to private companies. In our considered opinion, the ld. CIT(A) was justified in ordering for the deletion of this addition because the AO’s action did not have any valid bedrock. We, therefore, uphold the impugned order on this issue. This ground is not allowed. 11. In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed and that of the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced on the 16th day of May, 2012.
-
2012 (5) TMI 655 - ITAT JAIPUR
... ...
... ... ..... tent with the provision of sec. 36(1)(viia). The matter is restored back to the file of the AO for verification and issuing appropriate findings in accordance with law after hearing the assessee. 7.4 We may, before parting with our order, once again clarify that we may not be construed as having issued any final findings in the matter, being rather for most part not a subject matter of adjudication by the authorities below, but as having approved the assessee’s exigibility u/s. 36(1)(viia) in principle, on the basis of the assessee being a non-scheduled bank, and a banking company for all intents and purposes during as well as at the end of the relevant year. The admissibility of its claim there-under would in any case be subject to the satisfaction of the other conditions of the provision and the limit on quantum as specified there-under. We decide accordingly. 8. In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes.
-
2012 (5) TMI 654 - ITAT HYDERABAD
Investment towards unaccounted purchases - addition u/s 69 - addition being the estimation of profit at 5% on the unaccounted sales - addition on excess cash - unrecorded sales - addition on account of provisions of section 40A(3) of the Act though the assessee's income is determined u/s. 44AF
-
2012 (5) TMI 653 - ITAT HYDERABAD
Rejection of books of accounts - estimation of NP - Disallowance u/s. 40(a)(ia) - Held that:- Where the books of account have been rejected the revenue cannot rely on the same books of account for making any other addition. It was also held that when an estimate is made towards income of the assessee, it is in substitution of the income that is to be computed u/s. 29 and in other words, all the deductions which are referred to u/s. 29 are deemed to have been taken into account, while making such an estimate. This will also mean that the embargo placed in section 40 is also taken into account.
There cannot be any further addition u/s. 40A(3), 40(a)(ia) of the act or towards prior period income. However, we make it clear that the income so determined consequent to this order, after considering the above directions, shall not go below the income returned by the assessee for the assessment year under consideration, if so returned income to be considered.
-
2012 (5) TMI 652 - ITAT HYDERABAD
Depreciation computation - Held that:- This matter can easily be verified by the assessing officer and the explanation of the assessee in this regard can be checked from the records by the assessing officer. In these circumstances, we agree with the order of the CIT insofar as this issue is concerned referring to the matter to the AO for arithmetical verification and reconciliation between depreciation which in effect is debited to the profit and loss account and the amount which is added back in the memo of income, who will decide the issue after giving reasonable opportunity to the Assessee.
Provision made towards mine closure obligation - revision u/s 263 - Held that:- It is observed that the basis of calculation for the relevant AY 2006-07 for ₹ 71.18 crores was submitted during the original assessment and accepted by the AO. The detailed calculation of ₹ 21.31 crores charged to P&L A/c (on the basis of ₹ 71.18 crores) was also enclosed and produced before the CIT. Hence, the CIT is wrong in his observation that the estimate of ₹ 21.31 crore is excessively on a higher side and absolutely no realistic or rational basis for such calculation.
The CIT is not correct in invoking the provisions of Sec.263 as we find that the issue is debatable and when two views are possible the Assessing Officer has taken one view. The provisions for an accrued existing liability, even though, the actual expenditure may take place at a later date, is an allowable deduction and the CIT erred in treating it as an unascertained liability. Therefore, we set aside the order of the CIT passed u/s 263 and the order of the AO is restored.
-
2012 (5) TMI 651 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Extension of time for deposit of the amount pursuant to order dated 08.12.2005 - Held that:- The petitioner having failed to deposit ₹ 5 lacs and furnish indemnity bond, the consequence of such failure ensued immediately thereafter and there is no occasion for consider prayer of extension of time to deposit the amount at this distance of time - there is no justification to entertain the application after such a long period of more than 6 years - application rejected.
............
|
