|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 81 to 100 of 158 Records
-
1980 (12) TMI 78 - ITAT CALCUTTA
... ...
... ... ..... see claims it to be at Rs. 1,44,766. Both the entries happened to be on the same day and there is no material on record to warrant any inference adverse to the interest of the assessee since the peak has to be worked out and it has to be worked out by ignoring both of these entries and not taking the credit entry as if it was a first entry and the debt entry was a later one. We hold so and direct accordingly with the result that the peak credit in the case of the assessee has to be treated at Rs. 1,44,766 instead of Rs. 1,54,766. The assessee gets a relief of Rs. 10,000 with the result that the income in the case of the assessees stands reduced by Rs. 10,000. 9. No other aspect of the case has been pressed before us by the learned counsel for the assessee, though so many grounds have been taken. Hence, on the facts and in the circumstances of the assessee s case in appeal before us, we do hold that this appeal by the assessee partly succeeds to the extent mentioned as above.
-
1980 (12) TMI 77 - ITAT CALCUTTA
... ...
... ... ..... t cannot be said that the assessee is entitled to commission though it pertained to the year under consideration. This plea was not accepted by the ITO but the CIT (Appeals) accepted it. 2. In our opinion, no interference is called for. The assessee have given substantial reasons as to why it was not able to file the revised estimate u/s 212(3A). The assessee cannot confidently say that it was entitled to a particular commission merely because the sales took place. It all depended upon the realisation of the sale proceeds and settlement to be made by the principals. It is in this background it must be understood that the assessee had a genuine difficult in not anticipating the exact income. Sec. 273(c) is a penal provision and unless it is established that the assessee deliberately avoided filing of the revised return it should not be penalised. Taking, therefore, all the facts and circumstances of the case, we endorse the finding of the CIT (Appeals) and dismiss the appeal.
-
1980 (12) TMI 76 - ITAT BOMBAY-E
... ...
... ... ..... Married Women s Property Act, for the benefit of the decease s wife or children does not constitute payment to the donee either by way of gift or otherwise and so it could not be a gift within the meaning of s. 9 of the ED Act. 5. We have considered the contentions of both the parties as well as the facts on record. We find force in the contentions raised by the assessee. The language of s. 9(1) speaks of an immediate gift and so the premia paid by the assessee to the insurer cannot be said to be a gift to his wife. This is clear from a plain reading of s. 9(1). we find that a similar issue has been decided in favour of the assessee in the order dt. 27th Jan., 1975 of the Tribunal EDA No. 179/B/73-74. We have gone through the said order of the Tribunal and we are in respectful agreement with the reasoning given and the conclusion arrived at. In this view of the matter, we agree with the finding of the Appl. CED and uphold his order. 6. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.
-
1980 (12) TMI 75 - ITAT BOMBAY-A
... ...
... ... ..... n option by virtue of the grounds of appeal filed by the assessee before the CIT (A) and the stand taken by it. He relied upon the observations at page 85 of the report of the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of Bhausa Ganusa Pawar and Co. vs. CIT (1966) 62 ITR 75 (Bom) that It seems to us that....it is possible to take the view that where the requirements of law are in substance complied with and the conditions satisfied in substance, too much emphasise need not be laid on failure to comply literally and technically with the letter of the law.... Shri R.C. Desai stated at the Bar before us that the assessee has exercised the option and that it will be final in respect of its assessment for asst. yr. 1973-74 and later years. In our opinion, there is force in the contention of Shri R.C. Desai. Therefore, we do not interfere with the directions of the CIT(A) though we do so for reasons which are different from the reasons of the CIT(A). 7. The appeal is dismissed.
-
1980 (12) TMI 74 - ITAT BOMBAY-A
... ...
... ... ..... was borrowing loans and increasing its paid-up capital at the same time. Sri S. Krishnan, the ld. Deptl. Rep., pointed out that the accounts of the assessee-company showed that it paid out donations and suggested that this shows that it could have declared a dividend or a larger dividend. In our opinion, it is not as if the company exercised the choice between giving the donation and declaring a dividend. The donation is given at a point of time when the matter of declaring dividend is not under consideration and it is for the businessman to consider whether making of such a donation was prudent from the angle of the company s resources and its business. Merely because some small amounts were paid out by way of donation, we are not prepared to accept that the declaration of a dividend or a larger dividend as the case may be, was reasonable. 6. Having regard to all the facts and circumstances of the case, we reject the contention of the Department. The appeals are dismissed.
-
1980 (12) TMI 73 - ITAT BOMBAY
... ...
... ... ..... r its own business purposes is not challenged before us and what the Deptl. Rep. wants us to consider is that, taking an overall picture, it should be held that substantial amount belonging to the assessee has been advanced to the partners which it would not have been in a position to do if it was not having sufficient funds of its own and therefore, there was justification for disallowance. In considering the question as to whether the interest on moneys borrowed by the assessee is to be disallowed or not the only test to be applied is as to whether the borrowing is for the purpose of the assessee s business or not. On these, the undisputed finding is that the borrowals were for the purpose of assessee s business and have actually been utilised therefore. The genuineness of the borrowing not being and its utilisation for the purpose of business not being disputed, we are unable to uphold the Department s objection. 4. In the result, the Department s appeals stand dismissed.
-
1980 (12) TMI 72 - ITAT BANGALORE
... ...
... ... ..... emed to be the income and the State of Punjab promulgated two Ordinances to legalise the tax collected earlier. It was held that the Tribunal was rightly in holding that this sum was not assessable in the hands of the firm under s. 41(1) of the IT Act, 1961. Lastly, in Addl. CIT vs. T. Nagireddy and Co. (1976) 105 ITR 669 referred to by the Deptl. Rep. himself as having reconciled the decision in 87 ITR 542 (Chowringhee Sales Bureau Pvt. Ltd) and 82 ITR 363 (Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd), it was held that the amount of sales-tax collected could not be included in the total income of the assessee until and unless the matter was finally disposed of although the assessee was challenging the liability to pay the same. 7. Keeping in view the position of law as discussed above, we are of the opinion that the decision of the Tribunal taken earlier does not calls for any reconsideration. Respectfully following the same, we accept the appeal and quash the order of the CIT in question.
-
1980 (12) TMI 71 - ITAT BANGALORE
... ...
... ... ..... ion by the minor to which there was no legal bar in his way. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the Commr. was in error when he held that the present agreement was not valid in law. 7. Of course, we do not endorse upon the alternate argument of the representative of the assessee that the partnership deed entered on 7th June, 1975 has been subsequently rectified by another document by which the retrospective effect of this deed has been restricted to 1st June, 1975 only, and not earlier because, if the agreement was originally invalid, no rectification can make it valid. Secondly the departmental representative drew our attention to an affidavit purporting to have been sworn by Shri N.S. Yavagal that by virtue of the deed of partnership dt. 7th June, 1975, he had agreed to be a full-fledged partner for the sharing both profits and losses from 1st April, 1975. 8. In the result, for the reasons mentioned above, we quash the order of the CIT and restore the order of the ITO.
-
1980 (12) TMI 70 - ITAT BANGALORE
... ...
... ... ..... market value of the property sold in the later year was Rs. 60,000 as against Rs. 50,000 accepted by the Department. His only argument was in respect of the other half, the assessee had claimed it at Rs. 50,000 but the ITO had put it at Rs. 40,000 which had been enhanced to Rs. 50,000 by the CIT (A). Therefore, following this very line of reasoning the market value of this property sold during the second year, as on 1st Jan., 1954 should be put at Rs. 60,000 because the assessee had claimed it as such. We are afraid, we are not inclined to accept this contention. The same CIT (A) who increased the value from Rs. 40,000 to Rs. 50,000 in the first year had occasion to hear the appeal for the later year and he probably thought that the market value as on 1st Jan., 1954 for each portion could be estimated at Rs. 50,000. We do not propose to interfere with his conclusion. 10. The net result is that both the departmental appeals and the assessee s cross-objections stand dismissed.
-
1980 (12) TMI 69 - ITAT BANGALORE
... ...
... ... ..... e business of construction, manufacture and production of any one or more articles or things specified in the 9th Schedule, and (iii) in a small scale industrial undertaking for the purpose of business of manufacture or production of any other articles or things. Secs. 80J and 80HH also requires that the assessee should be an industrial undertaking which begins to manufacture or produce articles within the prescribed time. The authorities below have decided the issue only with reference to the word manufacture . On the other hand, they have not considered the question of production. Converting paddy into rice would certainly be production if we apply the tests laid down in the case of Singh Engineering Works Pvt. Ltd. 1978 CTR (All) 201 (1979) 119 ITR 891 (All) at 894 as well as the meaning of the word produced noticed in the decision in the case of AIR 1969 SC 930 at 931. In view of this we allow the appeal of the assessee and the ITO will revise the assessment accordingly.
-
1980 (12) TMI 68 - ITAT BANGALORE
... ...
... ... ..... i S. Abdul Sattar. It is correct that still the ITO may be at liberty to assess the newly constituted firm under s. 187 but that would have to be seen at the time of assessment itself. The fact remains that apparently there is nothing to disallow the assessee s claim for registration for that period. The only thing is that the claim was made for the entire period and the declaration was with reference to the same period. But since the claim for registration for a part of the year was made before the ITO himself, the declarations etc., according to sub-s. (3) of s. 185 should be considered to be defective and the ITO could have given an opportunity to the assessee to rectify the same. We, therefore, direct that the ITO shall give the assessee an opportunity to file a revised declaration under s. 185(3) of the IT Act and then decide the application afresh in the light of the our aforesaid observations. For statistics purposes, the appeal shall be deemed to be allowed, as such.
-
1980 (12) TMI 67 - ITAT AMRITSAR
... ...
... ... ..... t to the file of the ITO, who will dispose of the matter afresh after giving proper opportunity to the assessee. 13. The last credit of Rs. 2,500 relates to Smt. Ram Piari. She is an old lady of about 70 yours of age. Her affidavit has been filed and also her statement has been recorded. We have perused both of them and find that in the case of a lady of her age who was also illiterate, her version about such small amount of savings deserves to be accepted. The contradictions pointed out by the ITO, in our opinion, are not material. It has been stated by her that she received a family pension and she was being supported by the cousin brother of the husband. In such a situation a small saving of Rs. 2,500 can be available with a widow of the type under consideration. In our opinion, the loan received from her is satisfactorily explained. The addition of Rs. 2,500 is deleted. 14. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the stay application is dismissed.
-
1980 (12) TMI 66 - ITAT AMRITSAR
... ...
... ... ..... he contentions raised on behalf of the Revenue that in determining liability of the assessee under s. 271(1)(a) no account should be taken of the assessed tax. The assessee had paid a sum of Rs. 37,744 by way of advance tax. After the assessment under s. 148 he was found liable for an amount of Rs. 33,450 as tax. According to the explanation assessed tax means tax as reduced by the sum. If any deducted at source under Chap. XVII-B or paid in Chap. XVII-C. Looked at from this angle there is no assessed tax with reference to which penalty under s. 271(1)(a) can be worked out. We are in full agreement with the reasoning and finding in the ITA No. 3625/DEL/77-78 dt. 16th March, 1979 in ITO v. M/s Volga Restaurant, New Delhi. Following the same we hold that no penalty was leviable on the assessee under s. 271(1)(a) for the assessment year in issue. We are, therefore, upholding the order of the CIT cancelling the penalty. 5. In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed.
-
1980 (12) TMI 65 - ITAT AMRITSAR
... ...
... ... ..... imit the claim to Rs. 3,000 only. If there was such material then disbelieving the claim of the assessee for the rest would be to proceed on the basis of conjecture and surmises. We are, therefore, of the view that the assessee can be credited. With a saving of Rs. 40,000 in the beginning, the accounting year relevant to the assessment year in issue out of which five, six thousand he would have been required to spend on the maintenance. The balance of Rs. 34,000 would have been available for introduction in his business as worked out by the assessee. In our view, the amount for which the assessee has not given out the source cannot exceed more than a sum of Rs. 2,000 only, The addition of Rs. 23,000 maintained by the AAC is, therefore, reduced to Rs. 2,000, entitling the assessee a relief of Rs. 21,000. The finding of the AAC is, vacated and the ITO is directed to modify the assessment in light of our finding. 7. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed.
-
1980 (12) TMI 64 - ITAT AMRITSAR
... ...
... ... ..... J does not provide an enduring benefit to the assessee like development rebate, the assessee could not determine his income correctly, in view of the uncertainty of relief which could be granted to him by the ITO. We are informed that a sum of Rs. 2,39,218 has been worked out by the ITO as deduction arising under s. 80J. This deduction relates to the assessment year in question and does not include the deduction under s. 80J liable to be carried forward from the preceding years. Assessee had returned an income of Rs. 2,30,440 which would not be able to absorb fully the claim under s. 80J from the previous year to the year in issue. A part of this claim will be liable to be carried forward together with unabsorbed claim brought forward from earlier years. In this view of the matter, we cannot find that the assessee was in error in filing a nil estimate under s. 212. We, therefore uphold the finding of the AAC cancelling the penalty and dismiss the appeal filed by the Revenue.
-
1980 (12) TMI 63 - ITAT AMRITSAR
... ...
... ... ..... al lands made by the WTO, and, even on the basis of those estimates, the wealth in each year has been found to be slightly above the taxable limit. The WTO obtained the agreement of the assessee as is seen from the assessment order for the year 1971-72 by referring to certain comparable sales in regard to various villages where the assessee s land was scattered. The agreement, therefore, is brought about by the manner in which the WTO interpreted the comparable sales and such an agreement cannot be said to militate against the assessee s belief that he was not liable to wealth-tax. When the assessee entertained a belief about his wealth being below the taxable limit. It follows that he had a reasonable cause for not furnishing the wealth-tax returns by the due dates. His action in filing the returns later voluntarily cannot make his position worse. In the result, we hold that the penalties imposed are unsustainable and these are deleted. 4. All the three appeals are allowed.
-
1980 (12) TMI 62 - ITAT ALLAHABAD-A
... ...
... ... ..... r opinion, is not res integra. This issue had already been decided by the Tribunal and the finding of the Tribunal has been allowed to become final by the Revenue. It is not, therefore open to the Revenue to urge that the directors has rendered no services whatsoever to the assessee-company by standing guarantee to the bank on its behalf. The only legitimate enquiry which was to be made by the CIT (Appeals) after the remission of the case to him by the Tribunal was whether the payment of 1per cent commission was adequate bearing in mind the legitimate business needs of the assessee-company and the services rendered to the company by the directors. It appears to us that the payment of 1per cent guarantee commission is more or less a normal feature and even the bank charge commission at this rate. It cannot, therefore be regarded as an excessive payment. Accordingly, we upheld the order of the ld. CIT (Appeals). 11. In the result, the departmental appeals are hereby dismissed.
-
1980 (12) TMI 61 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-B
... ...
... ... ..... by an assessee shall be deducted in computing the capital employed by the assessee for the purpose of the said section. It is contended that in view of this specific provision, the order of the Tribunal to the contrary contained a mistake apparent from the record which could be rectified under s. 254(2) of the IT Act. 3. We are not able the accept the Departmental contention. The validity of the retrospective amendment to s. 80J of the Act made by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1980 has been challenged before the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court had also granted an interim stay against the operation of the said amendment in the case of the petitioner in that case. In the context of this position, when the validity of the retrospective amendment has been challenged and is in doubt, it is difficult to hold that the order of the Tribunal contains a mistake of law apparent from the record. In the circumstances, we are not able to entertain this application which is hereby rejected.
-
1980 (12) TMI 60 - HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
Milk powder ... ... ... ... ..... ket. 7. Our attention has been invited by Mr. Nanavati to the decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in The Andhra Pradesh Dairy Development Corporation Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India and Another, 1976 Taxation Law Reports 1976. The question which the learned single Judge of that High Court was required to answer was different. In that case, the whole milk powder was manufactured out of natural milk and, therefore, it was regenerated into fluid. The question which arose was whether the regenerated fluid milk was liable to excise duty. The learned single Judge answered the question in the negative. That view is quite sound. That is our view also. The liability to pay central excise duty is attracted again in the instant case because the regenerated fluid milk is subjected at a different time to a further mechanical process by which skimmed milk powder and butter are produced. 8. We, therefore, find no substance in this petition. The petition is dismissed. Notice is discharged.
-
1980 (12) TMI 59 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
Garments made to order of customers are not ready-made garments ... ... ... ... ..... t they were not engaged in selling ready-made garments, that they had used only a coal based iron for pressing the garments, and that ironing is not incidental or ancillary to the manufacture of ready-made garments, and have requested to set aside the orders of the lower authorities. 4. The Government observe that the petitioners contention that they were only tailors who made garments on orders from the customers has not been contradicted by the lower authorities and further that there is no evidence on record which disproves the said contention. In the circumstances the Government are of the view that the benefit of doubt should go in favour of the petitioners. In that view of the matter, use of electric iron for pressing the garments, even if made, cannot make the impugned goods excisable as garments made to order according to the requirements of individual customers cannot be termed as ready-made garments. 5. The revision application is allowed with consequential relief.
|
