|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 41 to 60 of 135 Records
-
1980 (11) TMI 113 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the corporation enjoys monopoly status which is State conferred or State protected?
Held that:- As agree with my learned brothers that the petitioner should be granted the relief proposed by them.
-
1980 (11) TMI 104 - ITAT MADRAS-D
... ...
... ... ..... or the execution of that job the assessee had to employ technicians and labour. Instead of drawing up the talent available in India the assessee employed some outsiders from abroad. That is all what happened in the case. The expenditure has all the characteristics of revenue nature and none of capital. We, therefore, allow it as a revenue expenditure. The reasoning of the IT Authorities to the contrary is nothing but faulty. So the claim is allowed as a revenue expenditure, deductible in the computation of the total income. II. Provision for Gratuity Rs. 49,141 Sec. 40A(7) of the IT Act, 1961 is not complied with. Hence this cannot be allowed as a deduction. Ground rejected. III. Travelling Expenses Rs. 2,354 Claim not pressed. IV. Development Rebate at 15 per cent as against 25 per cent claimed by the assessee For earlier assessment years the Tribunal has referred back this question to the ITO. So for this year also, it is referred back to the ITO. 5. Appeal allowed in part.
-
1980 (11) TMI 102 - ITAT MADRAS-C
... ...
... ... ..... ional word thing . Hence, there is absolutely no material for denying investment allowance in assessee s case. Under the circumstances, the assessee is entitled to succeed. We, however, find that the claim for investment allowance was not vetted by the ITO as, in his view, the assessee was not entitled to the same under law. We have found that it is so entitled. The ITO is directed to check the figures and allow the investment allowance in accordance with law. 6. In the result, the assessee s appeal is allowed on the lines indicated in the immediately proceeding paragraph. 7. As for the Deptl. appeal, the only question relates to the allowance of guarantee commission of Rs. 12,238 for obtaining benefit of deterred payment on instalment basis. The Madras High Court in the case of Sivakami Mills Ltd. (1979) 120 ITR 211 (Mad) found that such guarantee commission is admissible as a business deduction. Respectfully following the said decision, we have to dismiss the Deptl. appeal.
-
1980 (11) TMI 101 - ITAT MADRAS-C
... ...
... ... ..... at weightage should have been granted on the entire amount of Rs. 16,576 and telephone expenses considered as part of the common expenses along with salary of Rs. 3,37,508.17 and bonus of Rs. 22,348. All the three amounts add upto Rs. 4,62,810. The assessee wants 95 per cent of the same as the sales are of almost entirely exports. Since part of the expenses relate to purchases and processing, we are of the opinion that weightage can be allowed on such common expenses at 50 per cent of the same. So, weightage will be allowed on such common expenses of Rs. 2,31,405 which is 50 per cent of salaries, bonus and telephone expenses. These amounts of Rs. 2,31,405 and Rs. 16,576 (telex charges) will be in lieu of Rs. 40,000 granted by the ITO. In other words, weightage will be allowed on a further amount of Rs. 1,91,405 besides the allowance on export credit guarantee commission and quality control inspection expenses. 6. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed as indicated above.
-
1980 (11) TMI 99 - ITAT MADRAS-B
... ...
... ... ..... is also not proper to consider only the entry in the head office without taking into consideration the entries made in the branches at Madurai and Coimbatore. It is the final position after taking into consideration all debts and credits that is to be taken into consideration to find out how much is the income by way of interest is to be paid to Messrs. Dhanalakshmi Corporation. In this provision it is also to be noted that the emphasis is on income and not on the amount of interest paid because whatever may be the amount of interest paid if the recipient states that he is not assessable to income-tax then the question of deduction of tax at source does not arise at all. So only the net amount is the income paid. So the assessee is certainly right in the view. The stand of the Department is erroneous. As regards the Madras Race Club the assessee has no case at all. 4. So the appeal is allowed in part. The order of the ITO as regards M/s. Dhanalakshmi Corporation is concelled.
-
1980 (11) TMI 96 - ITAT MADRAS-B
... ...
... ... ..... of the partnership along with the legal heirs in the event of death of one of the partners. In the latter case the principle was clearly in favour of the tax payer and the facts are not essentially different. In both these cases, the view of the Madras High Court has been that s. 187(2) of the IT Act. 1961 does not alter the position in partnership law. The latter decision specifically approves the majority decision of the fuller Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Addl. CIT vs. Vinayaka Cinema 110 ITR 468 which specifically overruled the decision in 108 ITR 466 relied upon by the first appellate authority. It is a case of succession in assessee rsquo s case because of the intervening dissolution. Sec. 138 specifically provides for succession of one firm by another firm and since it is not a case of change in constitution, Sept., arate assessment are mandatory. Under the circumstances, the appeal is allowed. The ITO is directed to exclude the income after 1st Feb, 1975.
-
1980 (11) TMI 93 - ITAT MADRAS-A
... ...
... ... ..... est thereon had been eliminated, there was no debit balance in the account of the assessee other than the peak debit of Rs. 15,542 we have to hold that the payments made to the assessee by way of advances or loans in the year of account is only Rs. 15,542 and not even Rs. 18,753. We, therefore, hold that the view taken by the CIT (A) is correct and that he has not failed to carry out the directions given to him by the Tribunal when the case was remanded to him. In view of the fact that the loan amount was only Rs. 15,542, it now becomes really irrelevant and unnecessary to determine the accumulated profits. Even if the accumulated profits had been increased by the two sums referred to by the Tribunal in its order, still the loan amount taken by the assessee remains at Rs. 15,542 and only that amount has to be treated as the deemed dividend under s. 2(22)(e), whatever be the amount of accumulated profits. We, therefore, confirm the order of the CIT (A) and dismiss this appeal.
-
1980 (11) TMI 92 - ITAT MADRAS-A
... ...
... ... ..... irit of the law. No doubt, the return was filed only on 3rd Oct., 1975 voluntarily. Since the ITO has considered the delay in filing the voluntary return by not initiating any penal action, we cannot say that the option implied in the computation of amounts spent including the application in the three succeeding months is belated. Even in this view that entire Rs. 42,243 should be reckoned. Hence, in any view of the matter, we are unable to ignore the application of income in the next succeeding 3 months. Even if we take that what is applied for purposes specified in Form 10 above at Rs. 25,099 as mentioned in the grounds of appeal, this amount along with Rs. 2000 considered as application of income during the year in the preceding paragraph, the non-agricultural income will be nil on the alternative grounds now considered. Hence we are unable to find any support for the orders of authorities in any view. 7. In the result, the appeal is allowed and the assessment is annulled.
-
1980 (11) TMI 91 - ITAT MADRAS-A
... ...
... ... ..... ly lies before us. The circumstances under which the Madras High Court had delivered its decision in the case reported in (1977) 108 ITR 73 (Mad) are totally inapplicable to the facts of the present case because there the Madras High Court found that since the assessee did not object to the basis of assessment the assessee could not be said to be an assessee aggrieved by the assessment order and consequently could not file an appeal before the AAC and from then on to the Tribunal and to the High Court by way of reference But he is the case where the assessee is aggrieved by the non-grant of refund and non-allowance of interest Sec. 246 in terms provided that an assessee aggrieved by an order of assessment can file an appeal to the AAC. The ruling of the Madras High Court in (1977) 108 ITR 73 (Mad) is thus distinguishable and inapplicable. 14. In the result the appeals are allowed in part and the ITO is directed to grant interest on the refund as per the direction given above.
-
1980 (11) TMI 87 - ITAT MADRAS
... ...
... ... ..... n partitioned in definite portions. 16. In view of the foregoing, we are of the view that the assessments have to be remanded to the AO. He has to consider whether this is a case of partial or complete partition. If it is found to be a case of complete partition. If it is found to be a case of complete partition by metes and bounds, then only the question whether a claim under s. 29 was made, will arise. If it is found to be a case of partial partition, then the AO has to find out which properties have been divided. If he has no material to attack the genuineness of the document or the partition then he has to make a separate assessment on these members of the family in respect of income from agricultural lands falling to their share. With there observations, we set aside the assessments and direct the AO to make fresh assessments in accordance with our directions. 17. In the result, the assessments are remanded. 50 of the institution fee shall be refunded in all the appeals.
-
1980 (11) TMI 85 - ITAT JAIPUR
... ...
... ... ..... Under the circumstances the assessee cannot change the stand and say in the years of account that there was no income from property and the receipt was of capital nature. 13. In my opinion this contention of the Revenue has no force. On behalf of the Revenue no material was bought on record to show that really the assessee was the owner of this property. The assessee might have committed mistake in earlier years in showing his income as income from property but in the year of account the assessee has taken clear stand that it is not the owner of the property and the income received by the assessee was really capital receipt. It is settled law by now each year is independent year and the assessee has every right to plead its case in any manner it likes in each year. 14. Looking to the aforesaid facts and evidence on record, in my opinion the finding of the ld. AAC is quite correct and no interference is called for. 15. In the result the appeals fail and the same are dismissed.
-
1980 (11) TMI 84 - ITAT JAIPUR
... ...
... ... ..... hese items could not be taxed as capital gain 1.Silver Beds 2 2.Large silver chairs 2 3.Small silver chairs 2 4.Foot Stool silver 2 5.Elephant Hauda 1 4. The ITO did not accept the contention of the assessee and accordingly brought to tax a sum of Rs. 45,000 as capital gain arising out of the sales of the above articles. 5. On appeal, the AAC held that these items were personal effect held for personal use and, therefore, surplus thereon could not be assessed as capital gain. He also deleted the addition of Rs. 45,000 on account of capital gain. The Tribunal concurred with the AAC and dismissed the departmental appeal. While dismissing the departmental appeal, the Tribunal held that all the above items were used as furniture and held for personal use by the assessee or the members of his family within the meaning of s. 2(14)(ii) of the IT Act and, therefore, no capital gain was chargeable thereon. In our opinion, this is purely a finding of fact and no question of law arises.
-
1980 (11) TMI 83 - ITAT JAIPUR
... ...
... ... ..... ty once he received it from his father in succession. There being conflicting authorities on the issue whether the self-acquired property of the deceased-father would be the ancestral property or the individual property in the hands of the son, who constituted HUF at the time of death of the father, the golden rule as enunciated in the famous judgment of the Supreme Court in CIT vs. Vegetable Product s case 1973 CTR (SC) 177 (1973) 88 ITR 192 (SC). That when there are more than two views possible and plausible on some proposition, then the view more favourable to the assessee be taken should be followed. The decision of Gujarat High Court being clearly in favour of the assessee that the property would be treated as ancestral property in the hands of the son who constituted HUF at the time of death, we follow the same and hold that the property income is assessable in the hands of the HUF and not in the hands of the assessee as individual. 3. The appeal, is therefore, allowed.
-
1980 (11) TMI 82 - ITAT JAIPUR
... ...
... ... ..... t. yr. 1965-66. In view of our finding that no dispute was settled by the final decree but by the preliminary decree, which was passed much before the financial year relevant to the year under appeal, the contention of the assessee that the impugned income is not assessable during the year under appeal, has to be accepted. It is amply clear from the record that in no way is the impugned income assessable in year under appeal. We refrain from going into the question as to in which year precisely the income is assessable. The only question for consideration before us was whether the income is assessable in the financial year in which the final decree was passed. We have answered this question in negative. Legal objection raised by the assessee that the proceedings were not rightly initiated under s. 147(a) has not been pressed by the assessee and, therefore, that stands rejected. 4. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.
-
1980 (11) TMI 81 - ITAT HYDERABAD-A
... ...
... ... ..... above view (1) Addl. CIT vs. R. Boopathy (1978) 113 ITR 188 (Mad). (2) CIT vs. Gordhandas Moolchand (1979) 116 ITR 893 (Mad) The decisions cited by the ld. Deptl. Rep. are not relevant to the issue. In the case of Durga Timber Works vs. CIT (1971) 79 ITR 63 (Del) there was a clear finding that the assessee conceded that he had concealed his income. The facts in this case are different. Having carefully considered the entirety of the facts of the case we are of the opinion that there is no material to support the finding that the assessee was guilty of concealment of income or of furnishing inaccurate particulars of his income for any of the assessment years under appeal. We hold, therefore, that on facts there is no case made out for the levy of penalty. 5. In view of the above findings of facts, we think it is not necessary to give any finding on the legal points raised and argued before us by both the parties. 6. In the result, we cancel the penalties and allow the appeals.
-
1980 (11) TMI 80 - ITAT DELHI-D
... ...
... ... ..... lance of Rs. 3,950 was not noted in the cash book and the ledger and, therefore did not figure in the balance-sheet. There are thus two possibilities, it is quite possible that the inflation in the purchases was done by the assessee knowingly and to cover it the debt balance of Rs. 3,950 was omitted. It is equally plausible that the mistake was a mere omission and similarly the entry of Rs. 3,950 was omitted through over sight as no assessee would deliberately omit from the accounts a debit balance only to cover another wrong entry in the trading account. The assessee moreover is a wholesale dealer assessed on an income of Rs. 50,000 or so. The past record of the assessee has been quite clean. Taking into account all the circumstances we are inclined to hold that it has not been established by the Revenue that there was an attempt on the part of the assessee to suppress the income consciously. It was not, therefore a fit case of the levy of the penalty and hence we delete it.
-
1980 (11) TMI 79 - ITAT DELHI-C
... ...
... ... ..... 07 ITR 909 (Cal), r. 19A(3) is ultra vires of the provisions of s. 80J of the Act, and consequently the assessee s claim is admissible. On behalf of the Revenue, it is contended that Century Enka Ltd. stands superseded by Finance No. 2 Act of 1980 which is retrospective in effect. The assessee s reply to that is that the vires of the relevant provisions of Finance No. 2 Act of 1980 have been challenged before the Supreme Court and the Hon ble Supreme Court has stayed the operation of the said Act. In these circumstances, we considered it just and proper that the ITO should decide this point afresh in the light of the subsequent legislation in the shape of the Finance No. 2 Act and the decision of the Supreme Court thereon. We, therefore, set aside the orders of the AAC and the ITO on this point and restore the matter to the file of the ITO for a fresh decision in the light of the above observations and in accordance with law. 13. In the result, the appeals are partly allowed.
-
1980 (11) TMI 78 - ITAT DELHI-B
... ...
... ... ..... contention in the above year relates to levy of penal interest. The Allahabad High Court has held that it is not appealable. This case comes from the jurisdiction of the above High Court. We, therefore, confirm the finding of the AAC in this regard. 14. In the asst. yr. 1975-76, the disallowances of electricity expenses and house-tax for the personal use of the partner will have to be reconsidered in the light of the finding of the ITO with regard to the use and extent of that use by the partner as per our finding given in the asst. yr. 1973-74. Similarly, he will also have to reconsider the question of disallowance of depreciation on the buildings. 15. The disallowance of 1/3rd of car expenses and depreciation to that extent is confirmed as the car is also used by the partners for personal purposes. Charge of penal interest as held by us in the asst. yr. 1973-74 is not appealable. This contention also, therefore, fails. 16. In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed.
-
1980 (11) TMI 77 - ITAT DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... t of the assessee is the gross value of the sugarcane and not the net agricultural income. Thus the observation of the ITO that the net agricultural income shown in the income-tax return is only Rs. 8,000 in order to discredit the explanation of the assessee, is not quite relevant. The assessee had also produced, certificates from the Cane Development Inspector, before the authorities below, which fairly substantiated the contention of the assessee regarding the value of sugar-cane credited to his capital account. Keeping in view that the assessee was only an agriculturist in the past and had no other source of income and further taking into account substantial evidence produced by the assessee to support his explanations. I do not see any jurisdiction to maintain any part of the addition made by the ITO. Accordingly, the addition of Rs. 7,000 which was confirmed by the AAC, is deleted. 5. In the result, the assessee s appeal is allowed and the Revenue s appeal is dismissed.
-
1980 (11) TMI 76 - ITAT CUTTACK
... ...
... ... ..... isions of sub-s. 3 of s. 212. The case of the assessee before us is that aforesaid payment made by it is covered by s. 208(1)(a) because its income for the year referred to in sub-cl.(i) of cl.(a) of s. 209 exceeded the amounts specified in sub-s. 2 Factually it is correct because the total income of the assessee in terms of s. 209(a)(i) exceeded Rs. 2,500 (the assessee is a company) mentioned in s. 208(2) of the Act. That being the position the payment of Rs. 10,000 voluntarily by the assessee on 30th March, 1974 is to be treated as advance tax paid under Chapter XVII-C for the purpose of the explanation to s. 271(a)(i) of the Act. That being the position the assessee must get the credit for that amount while computing the penalty leviable under s. 271(1)(a) of the Act. I, hold like wise. The ITO is accordingly directed to recompute the penalty leviable against the assessee for the delayed filing of the return. 7. In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed.
|
