Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 141 to 160 of 231 Records
-
1984 (12) TMI 91 - ITAT BOMBAY-E
Borrowed Capital, Capital Asset, Capital Or Revenue Expenditure ... ... ... ... ..... two decisions, the principle laid down by the Bombay High Court in Calico Dyeing and Printing Works case has been modified. Out of these two decisions, the decision in Challapalli Sugars Ltd. s case has already been considered in the decision of the Gujarat High Court in the case of Alembic Glass Industries Ltd. and the other decision does not lay down any principle which militates against the view already expressed. For all these reasons, we hold that the interest in question was allowable as deduction under section 36(1)(iii). We direct the ITO to grant said deduction. 13. As regards commitment charges on LIC loan paid by the assessee, we are of the opinion that they constitute payment over and above the payment of interest. They have been paid in the course of borrowings effected for expansion of existing business and as such they are allowable as revenue expenditure under section 37(1). We direct the ITO to allow the same. 14. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed.
-
1984 (12) TMI 90 - ITAT BOMBAY-E
From Other Sources ... ... ... ... ..... same Laxmi Sprinklers . The interest credited to deposit account No. 1 for this year was Rs. 50,738 only as the assessee-HUF had repaid Rs. 1 lakh in this loan account. Therefore, the ITO was not justified in disallowing Rs. 59,280, ignoring the actual amount of interest paid by the assessee in this deposit account No. 1. Even out of this Rs. 50,738, the amount to be disallowed is Rs. 49,378 only, if Rs. 360 representing interest at 12 per cent per annum on Rs. 3,000 invested in the 8 Crown shares retained by the assessee-HUF is excluded. Thus, out of the deficit of Rs. 60,836 on account of interest in Vatav account claimed by the assessee-HUF, Rs. 11,458 is allowable instead of Rs. 1,556 allowed by the ITO (Rs. 60,836 minus Rs. 49,378). The ITO is directed to allow the said deficit of Rs. 11,458 as against Rs. 1,556 allowed by him and allow consequential relief due to the assessee. 20. In the result, the revenue s appeal and the assessee s cross-objection are partly allowed.
-
1984 (12) TMI 89 - ITAT BOMBAY-B
... ... ... ... ..... both the parties as well as the facts on record. In our opinion, the contentions of the assessee carry force. There is evidence to show that the money actually came from abroad. The remitter has confirmed the remittance which came through recognised banking channels. Apart from the affidavits sworn by Shri Karani, the enquiries made by the CIT(A) at the appellate stage also confirm the explanation of the assessee. Thus, here can be no doubt that the money came from abroad. The assessee has not enjoyed or treated the money as his own. There are enough funds in his bank account which cover the money held by him on behalf of Shri Karani. The fact that the money under consideration belonged to Shri Karani has been accepted in the wealth-tax assessments of the assessee. Under the circumstances, we see justification to treat the sum of Rs. 79,550 as income of the assessee. We, therefore, delete the same from the total income of the assessee. 9. In the result the appeal is allowed.
-
1984 (12) TMI 88 - ITAT BOMBAY-B
Capital Gains ... ... ... ... ..... which is owned by the assessee and which was or has been used for the purposes of business or profession is sold, discarded, demolished or destroyed and the moneys payable in respect of such building, machinery, plant or furniture, as the case may be, together with the amount of scrap value, if any, exceed the written down value, so much of the excess as does not exceed the difference between the actual cost and the written down value shall be chargeable to income-tax as income of the business or profession of the previous year in which the moneys payable for the building, machinery or furniture became due. In our view, considering the provisions of section 41(2), when the assessee was allowed written down value, while computing the capital gains, the depreciation which was allowed should be taken into account, and the ITO has rightly applied the provisions of section 41(2). Therefore, we restore the order of the ITO and reverse the order of the AAC. 8. The appeal is allowed.
-
1984 (12) TMI 87 - ITAT BOMBAY-B
A Firm, A Partner, Capital Gains, Extinguishment Of Right ... ... ... ... ..... s total income. Both the learned departmental representative, Shri Kumar, as well as the assessee s learned counsel, Shri Inamdar, submitted to us that the identical issue also cropped up in the appeals relating to the assessment years 1973-74 and 1974-75 in IT Appeal Nos. 1381 and 1382 (Bom.) of 1975-76 and the facts relevant to the point at issue, as well as the arguments of both the sides, were the same as were before the Tribunal in the appeals relating to the assessment years 1973-74 and 1974-75. 7. We have carefully considered the rival submissions. Following with respect the order of the Tribunal in the appeals relating to the assessment years 1973-74 and 1974-75, we uphold the direction of the Commissioner (Appeals) that the share of loss of the assessee s wife from the firm, V.S. Apte and Sons, in which the assessee is also a partner, should also be taken into account while working out the assessee s total income. 8. The appeal filed by the revenue is partly allowed.
-
1984 (12) TMI 86 - ITAT BOMBAY-B
Property Passing, Stamp Duty ... ... ... ... ..... s share of the deceased had passed under section 5 itself and, therefore, there is no need to go to section 39. Consequently, section 34(1)(c) would not be applied. But this objection has to be rejected because the Gujarat High Court has held that section 34(1)(c) would apply even if property passes under section 5. In Ramniklal J. Daftary v. CED 1982 136 ITR 422, it was observed . . . It is, therefore, not relevant whether the coparcenary interest of the deceased passes under section 5 or section 7 of the Act. In the instant case, the coparcenary interest of the deceased did pass on his death whether under section 5 or under section 7 of the Act and, consequently the provisions of section 34(1)(c) are attracted . . . . We will, therefore, hold that the lineal descendants share was rightly included. 26 to 28. These paras are not reproduced here as they involve minor issues. 29. The appeal filed by the accountable person is dismissed. The department s appeal is partly allowed.
-
1984 (12) TMI 85 - ITAT BOMBAY-B
Charitable Trust, Trusts Act ... ... ... ... ..... signments in the present case, because in both the cases the beneficiaries, in effect, gave away their rights. After they did it effectively in the eye of law, which we, on the authority of Smt. Kasturbai Walchand Trust s case, hold that they have done, the income so diverted could no longer be assessed as their income. This is not a case of application of income, because the amounts assigned did not go out of the income of the beneficiaries unlike the case of Sitaldas Tirathdas. Nor are the facts of the case hit by section 60 because, unlike the case of Provat Kumar Mitter even the corpus, producing the income under consideration, has been transferred by the beneficiaries. Thus, we find that none of the reasons given in support of the case of the revenue stands a scrutiny and the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) is based on sound reasoning and good authority. We, therefore, uphold the order of the Commissioner (Appeals). 8. In the result, the two appeals are dismissed.
-
1984 (12) TMI 84 - ITAT BOMBAY-A
... ... ... ... ..... mendment the clause would be applicable to all those persons who come within the definition of person residing outside India in s. 2(q) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973, irrespective of the fact whether they were non-residents or not within the meaning of s. 2(30) of the IT Act. This change has been brought about by express amendment in the clause. This confirms our view that prior to sake amendment the provision applied to only those assessee who come within the meaning of non-resident in s. 2(30) of the IT Act, 1961. We are concerned in these assessment years with the provision as it stood prior to the said amendment. Since admittedly, the assessee was not a non-resident as defined in s. 2(30) of the IT Act, 1961, in the relevant years, he was not entitled to exemption under cl. (4A) of s. 10 of the said Act. We accordingly confirm the orders of the CIT(A) rejecting the assessee s claim for exemption under the said clause. 9. The appeals fail and are dismissed.
-
1984 (12) TMI 83 - ITAT BOMBAY-A
Not Ordinarily Resident ... ... ... ... ..... se would be applicable to all those persons who come within the definition of person resident outside India in section 2(q), of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973, irrespective of the fact whether there were non-resident or not within the meaning of section 2(30) of the Income-tax Act. This change has been brought about by express amendment in the clause. This confirms our view that prior to the said amendment. the provision applied to only those assessees who came within the meaning non-resident in section 2(30). We are concerned in these assessment years with the provision as it stood prior to the said amendment. Since admittedly, the assessee was not a non-resident as defined in section 2(30), in the relevant years, he was not entitled to exemption under clause (4A) of section 10 of the said Act. We, accordingly, confirm the orders of the Commissioner (Appeals) rejecting the assessee s claim for exemption under the said clause. 9. The appeals fail and are dismissed.
-
1984 (12) TMI 82 - ITAT BOMBAY
... ... ... ... ..... ely rebutted by the conduct of the assessee in producing before the WTO all the essential particulars on which the estimate was based for due verification. 12. In CWT vs. Tejpal Oswal (1978) 112 ITR 429 (P and H), it was held that bona fide difference of opinion between the assessee and the WTO would justify cancellation of penalty under s. 18(1)(c) of the Act. This is because element of conscious or deliberate concealment would be absent. In Cement Marketing Company of India Ltd. vs. Asst. Commr. of ST (1980) 124 ITR 15 (SC), it was held that existence of bona fide belief that he is not liable to include a particular item in the return would exonerate the assessee from the allegation that the return file was false . Applying the principle underlying these deductions, we hold that there was no justification for imposition of penalty under s. 18(1)(c) of the Act. The CWT(A) was justified in cancelling the order of penalty. 13. In the result, the appeal fails and is dismissed.
-
1984 (12) TMI 81 - ITAT BANGALORE
... ... ... ... ..... n the case of CIT vs. Dewas Cine Corporation (1968) 68 ITR 240 (SC) which we have referred to hereinbefore. Further they stated at p. 75 that the transaction was in law an adjustment of rights of the partners and not relinquishment or even extinguishment of interest of the retiring partner. This was based on the decision in the case of Addl. CIT vs. Smt. Mahinderpal Bhasin 1978 CTR (All) 96 (1979) 117 ITR 26 (All). Accordingly, the High Court held that no capital gains was involved. Applying the decision of the Calcutta High Court, we find that no capital gain is involved in this case. The assessee received just what was due to her. There was no relinquishment by her of her rights of extinguishment of such rights by the firm. If something more than what was due to her had been paid, probably the question of capital gains might have arisen. Having regard to the facts of the case, we agree with the CIT(A) that no capital gains was involved in the transaction. Appeal dismissed.
-
1984 (12) TMI 80 - ITAT BANGALORE
Dispose Of, House Property, Income From Other Sources, Profits And Gains Of Business ... ... ... ... ..... n. The assessee continued to be the registered exporter of coffee. It maintained its establishment. The partners went abroad to explore the export market. The facts of the case will clearly prove that the assessee had the intention to carry on the business and it made all efforts to run the business. Merely because the assessee could not export coffee during these years, it cannot be held that the business has ceased to exist. In our view, the assessee carried on the activity of business and the expenditure claimed by the assessee is allowable. The firm was in existence and it carried on the business. Thus, the Commissioner was wrong in revising the assessment orders and the orders continuing registration. 8. The assessee s contention that the Commissioner had no jurisdiction to invoke section 263 at all cannot be accepted. Accordingly, we cancel the order dated 15-3-1983 of the Commissioner made under section 263 in all these years. 9. In the result, the appeals are allowed.
-
1984 (12) TMI 79 - ITAT BANGALORE
A Partner, Agricultural Land, Capital Gains, Partnership Firm ... ... ... ... ..... . 1968 68 ITR 240 (SC), which we have referred to hereinbefore. Further, they stated at page 75 that the transaction was in law an adjustment of rights of the partners and not relinquishment or even extinguishment of interest of the retiring partner. This was based on the decision in the case of Addl. CIT v. Smt. Mahinderpal Bhasin 1979 117 ITR 26 (All.). Accordingly, the High Court held that no capital gain was involved. Applying the decision of the Calcutta High Court, we find that no capital gain is involved in this case. The assessee received just what was due to her. There was no relinquishment by her of her rights or extinguishment of such rights by the firm. If something more than what was due to her had been paid, probably, the question of capital gains might have arisen. Having regard to the facts of the case, we agree with the Commissioner (Appeals) that no capital gains was involved in the transaction. 4. In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed.
-
1984 (12) TMI 78 - ITAT BANGALORE
Accounting Year, Excise Duty ... ... ... ... ..... unt. Looked from this point of view, he submitted that the assessee was rightly taxed on the sum of Rs. 8,26,474. 7. We are in agreement with the arguments advanced by the learned departmental representative. There is no contract between the assessee and its customers for refunding any refund or rebate in excise duty received by it. As pointed out by the learned departmental representative, there is no correlation between the stock received by the customers and the stock on which rebate in excise duty was given. As rightly pointed out, the excise duty was duly paid on the production is not refunded, but the duty payable by the assessee on future production is reduced by a quantity determined with reference to the excess production. Therefore, it is wholly appropriate to look at the problem from the payment side and not from the receipt side. In this view of the matter, we agree with the final decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) and dismiss the appeal filed by the assessee.
-
1984 (12) TMI 77 - ITAT ALLAHABAD-A
... ... ... ... ..... and ledger, but he submitted that that was necessary only for claiming the expenses debitable to P and L a/c. He contended that the department had not made any disallowance out of such expenses. 4. In my opinion, the contention of the counsel for the assessee must prevail. After having found no defect in the stock register or in the purchases and sales, the ITO could not reject the trading result. I am not concerned what happened in the earlier years but in the year under appeal the book result must be accepted as was done by the AAC. Nonmaintenance of other books of accounts could have been a ground for rejecting the expenses. The ITO has, however, allowed full expenses. I, therefore, uphold the finding of the AAC deleting the addition of Rs. 7,000. I may, however, express my unhappiness over the summary way in which he has disposed of this appeal. I will advise him to pass detailed orders with full reasons in deciding the appeals. 5. In the result, the appeal in dismissed.
-
1984 (12) TMI 76 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-C
A Partner, Partnership Firm ... ... ... ... ..... e circumstances in Leenky s case cannot be called in aid to support the revenue. In that case, ultimately, there was a single person who, in effect, entered into a partnership with himself in different capacities. There was virtually the absence of duality which is an essence of a partnership. A single person cannot form a partnership with himself, primarily because of the difficulty to enter into an agreement and secondarily on account of conflict of interest. Neither of these difficulties arise in the present case. The mere fact, therefore, that the trustees representing different trusts joined together to form a partnership, would not make the partnership either illegal or not genuine as a matter of fact. The Commissioner (Appeals) s order directing the grant of registration and continuation of registration has, therefore, to be upheld. I agree with the learned Accountant Member. The matter will now go back to the original Bench, which heard the appeal for proper disposal.
-
1984 (12) TMI 75 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-B
Life Insurance ... ... ... ... ..... ion. All that the clause requires is, that the assessee should have been ordinarily residing in a foreign country and on this point, the assessee s counsel is quite right. At the material time, the assessee could be said to be residing there on a semi-permanent basis. He was not there on a short trip or tour. Further, at the time of hearing, we were informed by the assessee s counsel on instructions that according to the terms of U.N. posting, the assessee had option of renewing his deputation for a further period of five years. Therefore, it cannot be said that the assessee had any definite intention of returning to India at the expiration of the fixed period and, consequently, there was no definite time limit to stay there. Therefore, it could well be said that he was ordinarily residing in America. Therefore, the assessee is entitled to exemption under section 5(1)(xxxiii). We set aside the orders of the Commissioner and restore that of the WTO. 7. The appeals are allowed.
-
1984 (12) TMI 74 - HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
... ... ... ... ..... ccurring in the Orissa Sales Tax Act. See Rameshwarlal Murlidhar v. State of Orissa - (1982) 51 STC 401 . 11. Having regard to these considerations, it seems to us that the material sold by the assessee-company, particularly, teleprinter rolls, adding machine rolls, and computer output papers should be classified as paper falling within Entry 125 of the Second Schedule. 12. Mr. Shukla next contended that printed forms, punch-cards and other printed sheets made to order and supplied to the respective purchasers by the assessee-company cannot at all be classified as paper and they should be classified as stationery if not works contract . We express no opinion on this contention since such a contention has not been raised before any one of the authorities below. We, however, make it clear that this decision shall not come in the way of the assessee-company from raising such a contention in the assessment of any other year. 13. With these observations, we dismiss these appeals.
-
1984 (12) TMI 73 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Drawback - Demand for duty drawback paid ... ... ... ... ..... October 1977, that they would export the same diamonds within six months after cutting and polishing them, became entitled to receive the drawback of 3 upon fulfilment of the condition. The public notice dated 7th April 1978 cannot be read in a manner that would seem to take away such right. The only manner in which it can be read is that it operates prospectively. 13. This, incidentally, is also the view taken by the Customs Appellate Tribunal. 14. It is unnecessary, then, to go into any of the other submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioners. 15. Having regard to the fact that the bank guarantees were realised by the respondents with interest, the petitioners are entitled to interest at the rate of 18 p.a. 16. The petition is made absolute in terms of prayers (a) and (b)(ii). In the case of the first petition, the petition is also made absolute in terms of prayer (b)(iii). 17. Rule accordingly. The respondents shall pay to the petitioners the costs of the petitions
-
1984 (12) TMI 72 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Demand - Central Excise Duty short-levied ... ... ... ... ..... since the issue as to whether or not excise duty should be refunded has been referred to a larger bench of the Supreme Court, no order for refund should be made until this issue is settled. The claim that was made for refund was of the order of Rs. 36,75,721.51. The Assistant Collector by the impugned order granted a refund of Rs. 24,36,065.44. The question now is whether the Assistant Collector should not also have ordered refund of an amount of Rs. 6,47,344.98. In the circumstances, I do not see that this issue arises here. 18. Accordingly, the impugned order is quashed and set aside to the extent that it disallows refund in the sum of Rs. 6,47,344.98 and the respondents are directed to pay the sum to the petitioners. That sum was deposited in court and withdrawn by the 1st petitioners against a bank guarantee. The bank guarantee shall stand discharged after four weeks from today. The respondents shall pay to the petitioners the costs of the petition. 19. Rule accordingly.
....
|