|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 61 to 80 of 188 Records
-
1978 (7) TMI 129 - ITAT CUTTACK
... ...
... ... ..... d so, it cannot be said to have resulted out of any fraud or gross or wilful neglect on the part of the assessee. Consequently, we come to the conclusion that the assessee did discharge the initial negative onus that was placed on it by the Explanation to s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. We find support for the above in the decision of the Hon ble Orissa High Court in the case of K.C. Behera in SJC Nos. 144 and 145 of 1975 dt. 11th Aug., 1977 and the decisions in the case of S.P. Bhatt(8) and Sadiq Ali and Bros.(3). Once the assessee comes out of the Explanation, then the provisions of the main Section 271(1)(c) come into play. In other words, it is then for the Revenue to show that the amounts assessee really represented the assessee s income and that it consciously concealed the same. We find nothing in the penalty order or on the record to show that this has been established. For the above reasons, we cancel both the penalty orders. 9. In the result, both the appeals are allowed.
-
1978 (7) TMI 128 - ITAT CUTTACK
... ...
... ... ..... he labourers were partly paid until the first payment was received by the assessee. He urged that the nature and the extent of work done by the assessee went to suggest that the initial investment in the contract business was not less than Rs. 15,000. 8. We have heard the submission of both the parties and considered the facts of the case. The fact that the assessee executed only the job of earth work during the year under appeal was not in dispute. To carry on such type of business only payment of labour is necessary. It is not improbable to make part payment to the labourers before the first payment was received by the assessee in consideration of the business done by him. In that view of the matter we are of the opinion that there was no reason to disbelieve the amount of initial investment as stated by the assessee and accordingly we find it difficult to maintain addition to Rs. 5,000 in this account. So we delete the same. 9. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed.
-
1978 (7) TMI 127 - ITAT CUTTACK
... ...
... ... ..... ng maximum penalty in his case. 5. We have given our careful consideration to the facts of the case. There was no dispute about the fact of concealment of assessee regarding his sources of income from share of a firm and that from a new truck while filing original return of income by him. There was also no evidence to show that the assessee s lawyer was instructed to include these two incomes in the original return and, that the said lawyer intentionally excluded these incomes. If that was the case of the assessee, he should have disclosed his incomes from the aforesaid two sources before receipt of notice under s. 148 from the ITO. The entirety of the circumstances would go to suggest that while filing the original return the assessee wanted to defraud the Revenue by exclusion of his incomes from the aforesaid two sources for which he was liable to maximum penalty imposable under the law. Accordingly we uphold the order of the AAC. 6. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.
-
1978 (7) TMI 126 - ITAT CUTTACK
... ...
... ... ..... he issue before the Tribunal was as to whether certain cash credits appearing in the books of the assessee could be said to have been explained satisfactorily so that they could not be assessed in the hands of the assessee under s. 68 of the IT Act, 1961. The Tribunal after an appreciation of the evidences on record, and the contentions raised before them, held that the explanation regarding the cash credits given by the assessee was indeed satisfactory. The finding given by the Tribunal is essentially one of fact giving rise to no question of law. We find support for the above view of ours in the decisions of the Hon ble Orissa High Court in Deo Narain Lal Jagdislal (5) and Ghewarchand Kamal Kumar (6). Again the decision of the Tribunal which had become final under s. 254 of the IT Act, cannot be disregarded is well settled and gives rise to no question of law as has been held in the decision relied on by Tribunal in their order quoted above. 9. The application is rejected.
-
1978 (7) TMI 125 - ITAT COCHIN
... ...
... ... ..... t of interest under s. 214 was not part of the order of assessment. I am unable to agree with he learned Departmental Representative and it is not necessary for me to decide whether the levy of interest under s. 214 is part of assessment order or not. Under the provisions of s. 154(1)(a) the jurisdiction to rectify the mistake is vested in the ITO is not confined to rectify mistakes in assessment orders but extends to mistakes in any order passed by him. It cannot even be the case of the Department that interest under s. 214 was granted without any order being passed by the ITO s. 246 provides for an appeal against an order under s. 154 to the AAC. In the resent case, the appeal is against an order under s. 154 and is, therefore, competent. The appeal is not against payment of interest under s. 214. 8. It is, therefore, not necessary for me to consider the question as to whether the appeal is permissible against an order under s. 214. 9. The Departmental appeal is dismissed.
-
1978 (7) TMI 124 - ITAT COCHIN
... ...
... ... ..... lled as interest or service charges for the purpose of getting loan from the banks. It is clear that that would be more than 21 1/2 per cent. We are, therefore, of opinion that there was no case for disallowance of Rs. 21,196. 8. We now take up the departmental appeal. The point in this appeal is whether the provisions of s. 160(1) would apply in the assessee s case. This point has already come up before us in the prior years and we have held in our order dt. 29th April, 1978 that the assessee is a representative assessee within the meaning of s. 160(1). It was submitted that the decision requires reconsideration in view of a Gujarat High Court decision reported in 112 ITR 652. That case cited has no relevance at all. That was a case of a discretionary trust and the High Court held that in such cases the assessment has to be made only on the trust and not on the beneficiaries. 9. In the result, the departmental appeal is dismissed and the assessee s appeal is partly allowed.
-
1978 (7) TMI 123 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... were also exempt, the exemption to the assessee should have been allowed for these two assessment years on the amounts claimed which were not disputed by either side. The Revenue, however, submitted that the claim of the assessee is not well founded because the explanation on the basis of which the claim is made was brought on the statute book w.e.f. 1st April, 1973. The learned counsel for the assessee could not controvert this. 23. After considering the claims of both the sides, we find that the exemption was not well founded as the exempted assets were not held for the statutory period of six months continuously before the valuation dates and the claim of the assessee could be accepted only w.e.f. 1st April, 1973 but we are dealing with the assessments for the year 1971-72 and 1972-73. This ground for the asst. yrs. 1971-72 and 1972-73 fails. 24. In the result, WTA Nos. 418 to 421, 424 and 425 of 1976-77 are allowed and WTA Nos. 422 and 423 of 1976-77 are partly allowed.
-
1978 (7) TMI 122 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... he point of s. 40A(5)(a) is erroneous. For the asst. yrs. 1972-73 and 1974-75, there is no other dispute other than the relief given by the AAC. on s. 40A(5)(a). 6. Coming to the dispute regarding relief under s. 80-J of the Act which is peculiar to the asst. yr. 1973-74, it was accepted by the parties that the Punjab and Haryana High Court judgment in the assessee s own case reported as CIT. vs. Patiala Flour Mills Co. (P) Ltd(1)., clearly covers the issue in the assessee s favour. Miss Chahal, however, submitted that the point should not be decided on any concession because the Revenue is likely to go in appeal. We see nothing wrong with such suggestion. However, respectfully following the noted Punjab and Haryana High Court judgment, we dismiss these Revenue appeals on the point that the A.A.C. wrongly directed the ITO to grant necessary relief under s. 80-J of the Act to the respondent assessee company. 7. In the result, Revenue appeals for the three years are dismissed.
-
1978 (7) TMI 121 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... inciple that where two interpretations are possible, the one favourable to a tax payer should be adopted while interpreting a taxing statute. Reference can be made to the SC Judgment cited as (1961) 41-ITR-425 such being the case, we are inclined to follow the Madras High Court judgment and hold in this case that when for the asst. yr. 1969-70 the return was filed on 20th March, 1970, the competent authority to impose penalty exceeding Rs. 1,000 could only be the IAC and assessing officer. The framing of assessment on 22nd Sept., 1972 did not clothe the assessing officer the assume jurisdiction for processing and leaying the penalty of Rs. 19,000, in relation to alleged concealment of Rs. 18,115. We, therefore, cancel the penalty and allow this assessee s appeal. 14. Before parting, in this case we like to observe that if we have not dealt with any of the authorities cited by the parties, it is because these have not been considered relevant to the issue. 15. Appeal allowed.
-
1978 (7) TMI 120 - ITAT CALCUTTA-C
... ...
... ... ..... . In this context one should realise the assessee s difficulty in obtaining confirmation certificate form the creditor. Now, before us, a confirmation certificate from the creditor has been produced. M/s. Sanwarlal Singhania admitted the genuineness of the transaction. With the assessee the said creditor firm had so many the transactions genuineness of which had not been doubted. Moreover, the enquiry conducted by the Department that the lending was not recorded in the books of account of the creditors was not made known to the assessee. In these circumstances, we admit the confirmation letter as piece of evidence but direct the AAC verify the same by giving a reasonable opportunity to the ITO to place his submissions before him on the issue. For this restricted purpose, we set aside the AAC s order and restore the appeal to his file for fresh decision in accordance with law. 10. In the result, the assessee s appeal is partly allowed and the Department s appeal is dismissed.
-
1978 (7) TMI 119 - ITAT CALCUTTA
... ...
... ... ..... 1-024-PT-264. The assessee contended that construction cost was borne by S.R. Goenka but an adjustment was made by S.R. Goenka on 31st day of March, 1970 with the assessee. The Adjustment Account is as under. Cr. Dr. 2,02,835-63 By New const. Joint A/c. 1,44,964-48 To New Building const. A/c. Made New 1,44,964-48 New Blge. Bldg. Cost. Cost A/c. 970-04 Bank of India, Barabazar Joint A/c. Rs. 5,79,857-92 cost divided Corporation of share. 25 paise Per rupee. . 970-04 to Bank of India 50,000-00 Shri Kishori Lkal Goenka Joint A/c. . 50,000 To Kishori Lal 6,901-11 Cash Goenka New Bldg. Const. Joint A/c. The assessee s Accounting Year ended on Diwali 2028. Thus, it could be found that the investment during this year is explainable out of the construction cost account maintained by S.R. Goenka in his books of accounts. S.R. Goenka also appears to be a person of means apart from being assessee s son. Thus, we delete the addition of Rs. 53,767. 7. In the result the appeal is allowed.
-
1978 (7) TMI 118 - ITAT BOMBAY-C
... ...
... ... ..... ch is that the opportunity of being heard is to be given to the parties before the quasi-judicial authorities and being so, to the defaulter the non-attendance before the ITO on the appointed day. If it is not done, then principles of natural justice are violated and the order is void ab initio. In this case no opportunity of being heard was given to the assessee-appellant before imposing the fine amounting to representative Rs. 500 under s. 131(12) of the Act, and the authorities below are void ab initio. Hence we set aside the order of the authorities below on this score also. 8. In the result, the appeal is allowed. ORDER B.B.PALEKAR, A.M. I have gone through the order drawn by my ld. brother. I hold that having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, penalty should not be sustained. I agree that it is cancelled. With respect, I do not express any opinion on the legal aspects, as in my opinion, it is unnecessary to do so. 10. I agree that the appeal is allowed.
-
1978 (7) TMI 117 - ITAT BANGALORE
... ...
... ... ..... e trustees. In my opinion, this is the correct view of law in so far as the assessment of the share of the beneficiaries in their hands, of the trust income is concerned and to the extend that the proportionate share of the income is derived from non-chargeable income i.e. agricultural income, the apportionment has to be made under s. 165. 8. As a result, therefore, the assessee succeeds in all the years and the appeals are allowed. Since she has no other income except the annuity income in the years 1967-68 onwards and before that there is added to the income from annuity, the value of the rent free bungalow and upkeep of the bungalow etc. The ITO shall have to make a recomputation of the assessable income only in those years in which the beneficiary has been directly assessed in the same way as the other beneficiaries have been assessed by applying s. 165. In the years in which the trustees have been assessed, the assessment in the hands of the assessee shall be cancelled.
-
1978 (7) TMI 116 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYD.
Warehousing ... ... ... ... ..... e Central Government accepted the finding. Therefore there is nothing before this Court to show that any of the three Tribunals did not have jurisdiction to pass the impugned order. There is also nothing to show that any of the three Tribunals violated any statutory provision in regard to the procedure that should be followed before passing the impugned order. It does no appeal that there is any error in the finding of fact arrived at by the Tribunals below. Even otherwise it is not for this court to sit in appeal over the finding of fact arrived at by the Tribunals. It is not the case of the petitioner that there is no evidence at all to arrive at the finding. It is not open to the High Court while exercising it extraordinary jurisdiction under Art. 226 of the Constitution to sit in appeal over the finding of fact even if the finding appears to the High Court to be erroneous. I do not, therefore find any merit in this Writ Petition which is accordingly dismissed with costs.
-
1978 (7) TMI 115 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Export - Unmanufactured tobacco - Customs Valuation ... ... ... ... ..... be no order as to costs. This case will now go back before the respondent No. 1 for determination of the claim of the petitioner on the basis of the rate as mentioned in Item No. 24 of the tariff viz., .75 paise per kilogram or un-manufactured tobacco as mentioned above. The respondents would be entitled to check and consider such evidence that would be led and would also be entitled to consider the petitioner s case in defence and also to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. 11. From a reference to the impugned order, it would appear that there was another proceedings which was disposed of by the same determination and that other proceeding is the subject-matter in Civil Rule No. 1893(W) of 1973. Since the facts in these two cases and the points of law as involved, are the same, the order which have proposed in Civil Rule No. 1894(W) of 1973, would also govern Civil Rule No. 1983( ) of 1973. 12. The prayer for stay of operation to the order, as made, is refused.
-
1978 (7) TMI 114 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Plant and Machinery - Seizure of goods - Removal in contravention of any rule - Confiscation - Classification List - Change in the stand of Excise authority -Effect - Search and Seizure - Scope of
-
1978 (7) TMI 113 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
Seized goods released on bond ... ... ... ... ..... e petitioners were to produce the goods before the Adjudicating Officer. From the case records, it is seen that the petitioners were not asked to produce the goods at the time of adjudication. In view of this, the observation of the Appellate Collector to the effect that in not asking the petitioners to produce the seized goods which had been cleared provisionally is, no doubt, a technical lacuna but because of the said lacuna, it cannot be said that the confiscation order and imposition of redemption fine are not valid is not correct. In the circumstances, Government of India remand the case for fresh adjudication by the original authority.
-
1978 (7) TMI 112 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
Khandsari - Compounded Levy Scheme ... ... ... ... ..... revised form in 1975-76. The plea of the petitioners that since their factory stopped working from 11-5-1975 there was no need to apply for working under the compounded levy scheme as required under Notification No. 95/73 is acceptable. However, it is seen from the Appellate Collector s order that for the period 30-4-1975 to 11-5-1975 the character of clearances whether under standard procedure or under compounded levy scheme, is not clearly indicated. To get benefit of compounded levy scheme, clearance for the period covered by the Revision Application and in terms of Notification No. 95/75 and Board s order, it is necessary for them to pay duty at the compounded rate for this period as well. The explanation of the petitioners for delay in application to work under the said scheme is acceptable, subject to the observation regarding working of the factory during 30-4-1975 to 11-5-1975. 4. In view of the foregoing circumstances, Govt. of India allow the Revision Application.
-
1978 (7) TMI 111 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
... ...
... ... ..... llowed the appeals on the ground that the products did not qualify for assessment as strips, as they were not products of a regular strip mills. 3. Government of India had issued show cause notice for review of the above appellate orders wherein it was tentatively held that the impugned goods known as patties were strips within the meaning of Tariff Item 26AA(iii) C.E.T. 4. Government of India on consideration of the matter in the light of the submissions made by the parties observe that the impugned stainless products referred to as patties in commercial parlance and made in a place other than a strip mill, by hot or cold rolling process from scrap cuttings of duty paid unused, re-rolled rods/billets would not be classifiable as strips under Sub-item (iii) of Item 26AA C.E.T. They however are classifiable under Sub-item (ia) of item No. 26AA C.E.T. 5. Government of India order that the review proceedings against the order-in-appeal listed in the annexure are hereby dropped.
-
1978 (7) TMI 110 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Jute twine and Jute yarn - Cess ... ... ... ... ..... bsence of any such restriction. 16. Lastly, it is contended that all jute twines, rope and thread are not of the same kind and quality. Different yarns of different kind made from different quality of jute for different purposes cannot be treated equally and are not similarly situated and circumstances. It is contended that inequals have been treated equals and therefore, the imposition of uniform rate of cess on all jute twine, thread, ropes and yarns is ultra vires of Article 14 of the Constitution. 17. The Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951 has been placed in the 9th Schedule. In view of above, the petitioner cannot urge any discrimination under Article 14 of the Constitution. 18. As all the points raised by the petitioner fail, this Rule is discharged. There will be no order for costs. 19. I make it clear that all other points taken in the petition are left open and the petitioner shall be at liberty to urge these points before the appropriate authorities.
........
|
