|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 101 to 120 of 236 Records
-
1988 (12) TMI 136 - ITAT BOMBAY-B
... ...
... ... ..... as an asset allegedly transferred by the settlor, has to be assessed in his hands. It is also admitted that the said dividend income had also been assessed in the hands of the settlor. At page-10 of the compilation, there is an assessment order under s. 143 of the Act in which the dividend income of Rs. 45,000 had been included as the income of the settlor. When the income has to be assessed in the hands of the settlor, and it has also been assessed in his hands, we fail to understand as to how the assessee trustee comes in the picture for the purposes of claiming refund of the tax deducted at source on the dividend income. It is the settlor who can claim the refund of the tax deducted at source on the dividend and not the assessee. We, therefore, hold that the authorities below were perfectly justified in the eyes of law in not granting refund of tax on dividend income deducted at source in the hands of the settlor. We see no reason to interfere. 5. The appeal is dismissed.
-
1988 (12) TMI 135 - ITAT BOMBAY-A
... ...
... ... ..... ntly would be irrelevant. What is relevant is as to what were the circumstances on the date of estimate. On the date of estimate the assessee could have entertained reasonable belief that the said amount would be allowable. 16. Considering all the circumstances, we find that if the amount, which we have discussed above, had received the same treatment as the assessee genuinely believed at the time of making the estimate to be the correct treatment, the penal provision would not have been attracted. The fact that the belief entertained by the assessee at the time of preparing the estimate turned out to be not sustainable would not attract the penal provision under s. 273(2)(a). This is because at the time of estimate the assessee did not know or had reason to believe that the estimate which the assessee made was untrue. We, accordingly hold that provisions of s. 273(2)(a) were not attracted in the present case. We cancel the order of penalty. 17. Both the appeals are allowed.
-
1988 (12) TMI 134 - ITAT BOMBAY-A
... ...
... ... ..... hich he is bound to incur because of the dignity and status in going from residence to the Court and then from Court to his residence for the discharge of his judicial duty which is enjoined on him by the high office or employment of profit to the extent to which such expenses are actually incurred for the purpose. The words subject to maintenance of a car specifically bring the said allowance under exemption provided under s. 10(14) of the IT Act, 1961. 12. Taking all these considerations and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that the words used conveyance allowance in s. 22 B of the High Court Judges (Conditions of Service) Act, 1954, denote, in fact, special allowance which is covered under s. 10(14) of the IT Act, 1961. The assessee, who is an Hon ble Judge of the High Court, is, therefore, entitled to the maximum deduction of Rs. 3,500 as provided under s. 16(i) of the IT Act, 1961. We decide the issue in favour of the assessee. 13. The appeal is allowed.
-
1988 (12) TMI 133 - ITAT BOMBAY-A
... ...
... ... ..... t the double or tripe extra shift allowance would be allowed for the entire period without making any attempt to determine the number of days on which each machine actually worked double or tripe shift during the relevant period. In view of this, we do not find any substance in this ground of Revenue which is hereby rejected. 41. The last ground in Revenue s appeal is that the CIT (A) erred in holding that the provisions of s. 40(C) and not the provisions of s. 40(A)(5) of t he Act are applicable in the case of Director employees and on that ground directing the ITO to recompute the disallowance accordingly. We find that this issue is decided by the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Geoffrey Manners and Co. Ltd. Respectfully following the said decision of the Special bench, we dot not find any substance in this ground of appeal of the Revenue, which is hereby rejected. 42. In the result, assessee s appeal is partly allowed and the departmental appeal is dismissed.
-
1988 (12) TMI 132 - ITAT BOMBAY-A
... ...
... ... ..... ion of the rival submissions of the parties, here also we do not find any justification to interfere with the order of the CIT(A). 15. The last point pertains to allowance of Rs. 2,500 being the fees paid to Shri Ajay Thakore, which the ITO had disallowed by invoking the provisions of s. 80VV of the Act. It may be mentioned that the assessee had also come up in appeal against the order of the CIT(A), wherein he had upheld the action of the ITO in disallowing Rs. 13,000 out of Rs. 15,500 by invoking the provisions of s. 80VV of the Act. In the present appeal the Revenue has come up in appeal in respect of allowance of Rs. 2,500 out of Rs. 15,500 claimed by the assessee. Vide our order of even date in the appeal filed by the assessee (ITA No. 4887 (Bom)/1984) we have confirmed the order of the CIT(A) on this point. In this view of the matter, we have no hesitation in upholding the action of the CIT(A) allowing deduction of Rs. 2,500. 16. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.
-
1988 (12) TMI 131 - ITAT BOMBAY-A
... ...
... ... ..... ned a laboratory for quality control, or inspection of such goods. We hold accordingly and allow the claim of the assessee on this point also. 5. With regard to the merit of the case, it is seen that the learned CIT(A) himself admitted that the process of fumigation would help prevent decay of the goods handled by the assessee for export. In such a case, it is not clear how it cannot be said to be for the quality control of the goods exported. If the assessee disinfects or purifies or fumes the goods for export so as to prevent decay and deterioration, such activity is definitely in the nature of quality control as contemplated under s. 6AA of the IT Rules. Similarly, the rules provide for maintenance of facilities for inspection of such goods and, therefore, the expenditure in terms of export inspection charges qualify for such deduction. We hold accordingly. The ITO is directed to recompute the relief under s. 35 as indicated above. 6. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1988 (12) TMI 130 - ITAT BANGALORE
Assessing Officer, Bona Fide, Legal Representative ... ... ... ... ..... t is enough to observe that all the properties which belonged to the estate of Shri Venkatadri should be amenable for meeting the liability under the assessment, it is unnecessary to make any comment in this regard and the observation of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) extracted by us above requires to be expunged. We do so. The gravamen of the legal heirs, including the wife Anusuya, seems to be that the property in Bangalore City and sought to be sold in the recovery proceedings was the personal property of Anusuya. While not mentioning anything in regard to this dispute as being not relevant for the present appeals, we need not observe that the liability of the legal representatives is limited to the extent the assets of the estate (if any) of Venkatadri for meeting the outstanding demand as provided in section 159(6). With this observation, we dispose of the appeals by the following order. 13. The appeals are dismissed, subject to the observations in paragraph 12
-
1988 (12) TMI 129 - ITAT BANGALORE
Assessment Year, Civil Court ... ... ... ... ..... ghtaway rejected. 13. For all the above reasons, we hold that the indenture dated 19-7-1975 effected a valid gift of the properties so as to bring the case within the mischief of section 4(1)(a) and as such liable to charge. 14. The last argument pressed on behalf of the assessee was in regard to valuation. It seems the Gift-tax Officer has taken the valuation as per the report of the Departmental Valuation Officer furnished in the wealth-tax assessment. It was stated that there was some reduction in value in appeal in the wealth-tax assessment. There is no proof in this regard. However, we direct the Gift-tax Officer to take the finally determined valuation in the wealth-tax assessment and reframe this assessment accordingly in case such valuation is less than the figure adopted for the purpose of this gift-tax assessment. We accordingly issue a direction in this regard. 15. The appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed subject to the direction given in the earlier paragraph
-
1988 (12) TMI 128 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-C
... ...
... ... ..... ed from the view taken by the Full Bench of the Gujarat High Court in Chhotalal and Co. s case yet on the point of salary payment by the firm to its partner(s) the Allahabad High Court had fully endorsed the view of Gujarat High Court, as mentioned above. Even the minority view, expressed by Dr. R.R. Misra, J., did not dispute the correctness of Chhotalal and Co. s case on any point including the point of salary payment by the firm to its partner(s). We thus find much force in the argument of Mr. Sharma, Departmental Representative, that the view of the Allahabad High Court too supports the stand of revenue. 15. In view of the discussion made above we are clearly of the view that in the presence of the Full Bench decision of the Gujarat High Court in the case of Chhotalal and Co., the reliance by the appellant on the Andhra Pradesh High Court decision, referred to above is not well founded. 16. In the result, we find no force in this appeal and hereby dismiss it accordingly.
-
1988 (12) TMI 127 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-A
... ...
... ... ..... esentative the visiting doctor merely attends to patients in the hospital at some stated hours and he is not controlled by conditions of services governing other members of the staff. Therefore, such an employer-employee relationship is absent in his case. 5. Finally, we would like to say that it is because the payment is not to be regarded as salary, that it is called an honorarium. The whole purpose of using the word honorarium is to avoid using the word salary . The visiting doctor would not like to have it mentioned at all as salary. It is a matter of his honour and that is why it is called honorarium. When that is so, he cannot claim it as salary before the income-tax authorities. In other words, if he wants the honour he cannot claim the payment as salary. Consequently, he has to forego the standard deduction. We, therefore hold that the payment is not salary and the claim to a standard deduction under s. 16(1) is not justified. 6. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1988 (12) TMI 126 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Refund - Demand - Limitation - Estoppel - Dutiability - Writ jurisdiction ... ... ... ... ..... 1-1988 (Annexure 13 to the writ petition) passed by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue), it appears that a similar communication was also sent to the Government of India which by the said order, asked M/s. Dabur to contact the Commissioner of Excise, Government of Uttar Pradesh for giving effect to the order of the Government of India. No decision is said to have been taken yet on such request of petitioner by the Excise Authorities. Since the request for refund was made by M/s. Dabur to the District Excise Officer as early as 4-10-1988 vide Annexure 18 to the writ petition, we hope and trust that the Excise Authorities will take a decision on such request of the petitioner as expeditiously as possible according to law. 16. For the reasons, we are of the view that these are not the fit cases to invoke our extraordinary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. All the writ petitions are, therefore, dismissed in limine.
-
1988 (12) TMI 125 - HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Refund - Customs ... ... ... ... ..... m order passed by the Tribunal. The petitioner has made demand for restitution and for discharge of the bank guarantee, but the respondents have not acceded to his request in view of the projected appeal to the Supreme Court. More than five months have elapsed since the order Ext. PI, without the refund being granted or the bank guarantee being cancelled. The respondents are therefore liable to be compelled by the issue of a writ of mandamus to perform their constitutional duty and to make restitution of the amount paid and to discharge the bank guarantee. The respondents are no doubt contending that the order of the Tribunal is unsustainable in law. That is a matter for them to urge before the Supreme Court in the appeal which they are filing. 6. I allow the original petition. The respondents are directed to refund to the petitioner the amount of Rs. 3.5 lakhs, and to discharge the bank guarantee, within a period of two months from today. There will be no order as to costs.
-
1988 (12) TMI 124 - HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Rate of Customs duty - Agents (Customs) ... ... ... ... ..... e is set aside. The respondents are directed to make a fresh assessment within one week from the date of communication of this order at the rate applicable in respect of the subject goods on the date when the goods entered the territorial waters of India, i.e., October 2, 1986. The petitioner has got the goods released upon payment of enhanced duties in terms of the impugned notification. The respondents are directed to refund such amount as may be found refundable being the difference between the duty leviable on the subject goods at the rate applicable on such import on October 2, 1986, and the duty actually paid by the petitioner. In the event the refund is not made within two weeks from the date of assessment, the respondents shall pay interest at the rate of 12 on the amount to be refunded from the date of this order till the date of payment. 49. There will be no order as to costs. 50. All parties to act on a signed copy of the operative part of this judgment and order.
-
1988 (12) TMI 123 - HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Import - Writ jurisdiction - Valuation (Customs) - Charge of under-valuation ... ... ... ... ..... udication dated 29th September 1987 passed by the Collector of Customs is set aside and quashed. The Collector of Customs is directed to pass a fresh order of assessment assessing the subject goods in the list of Bills of Entry and other evidences produced by the petitioner regarding the valuation of the subject goods. The Collector of Customs will in particular take into account the assessable value determined by the Customs Authority in respect of the similar consignments before or after the importation of the subject goods. Upon assessment being made, the duty already paid for release of the 50 of the subject goods shall be adjusted and the balance duty shall be paid by the petitioner. The goods shall be released within four days after the order of adjudication is made by the Collector of Customs. Let a fresh order be passed within three weeks from the date of communication of this Order. Parties will act on the signed copy of the operative part of the judgment and order.
-
1988 (12) TMI 122 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Writ petition - Alternative remedy ... ... ... ... ..... etitioner had failed to establish that the duties had been paid under protest. The order of the Assistant Collector dated 21-7-1988 (Annexure 13 to the writ petition) is appealable. The petitioner having the statutory right of appeal against the order of the Assistant Collector, the writ petition is dismissed in limine. The petitioner informs that the limitation for filing the appeal expired somewhere in November, 1988, but before the writ petition was filed. Since we are dismissing the petition in limine on the ground of alternative statutory remedy, we direct that the appellate authority will not reject the appeal, if filed by the petitioner within two weeks from today, on the ground of limitation. Since the matter is pending for a long time, the appellate authority may dispose of the appeal within the period of three months, if possible. 2. Let a certified copy of this order may be given to the learned counsel for the parties, on payment of usual charges, within 24 hours.
-
1988 (12) TMI 121 - HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Valuation (customs) - Writ jurisdiction ... ... ... ... ..... he valuation adopted. There is no evidence that the goods have been under-valued. At least the department failed to establish such alleged undervaluation. The realisation of the alleged short levy from the petitioner cannot be sustained and must be quashed. 49.In the result, this application is allowed to the extent indicated above. The order of adjudication including short levy demand notices shall stand set aside and quashed. The Collector of Customs is directed to refund the amount collected by the Customs authorities from the petitioner as and by way of short levy demand. The Customs authorities shall also refund the excess amount of Customs duty realised by levying duty of spare parts as complete V.C.R. Sets. Customs duties shall be charged on assessment of the consignment as components/parts only. Let the personal penalty amount paid by the petitioner be refunded to the petitioner. 50. Parties will act on the signed copy of the operative part of the judgment and order.
-
1988 (12) TMI 120 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Gold (Control) - Enquiry and investigation - Arrest ... ... ... ... ..... ation of these cases in all reasonable manner. (ii) All the petitioners shall attend the office of the Collectorate of Customs (Preventive), Gold Control, Bombay, on every Friday during office hours for the purpose of investigation of these cases. (iii) In addition thereto all the Petitioners shall make themselves similarly available before the Investigating Officer at all other reasonable times during office hours if so strictly required for the purpose of investigation of these cases. These two conditions about reporting before the Investigating Officer shall remain in force only for a period of two months. (iv) All the Petitioners shall not leave the city limits of this metropolis without the permission of the Investigating Officers and if an emergency arises then they shall before leaving intimate to the concerned Officer. This condition shall remain in force only for a period of one month. (v) They shall not indulge in any manner to tamper with the prosecution evidence.
-
1988 (12) TMI 119 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT CALCUTTA
Search and seizure - Reasonable belief ... ... ... ... ..... e considered by this Court at this stage. However, this observation of this Court will not in any way prejudice the petitioner to agitate this point after the final assessment if the petitioner is so entitled in accordance with law. 8. Pursuant to the order of Hon ble Mr. Justice T.K. Basu (as His Lordship then was) the entire goods had been released in favour of the petitioners and the petitioner has sold off the said goods and has realised the sale proceeds. 9. In view of an interim order passed in this appeal by Hon ble Mr. Justice Anil Kumar Sen and Hon ble Mr. Justice S.K. Mukherjee (as Their Lordships then were) this Court makes it clear that the final order passed by this Court in the appeal will not prevent the respondent authorities from finally making the assessment after giving notice to the appellant if not already notified. 10. The bank guarantee given by the appellant shall be renewed till further orders of this Court. 11. The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
-
1988 (12) TMI 118 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Customs - Confiscation - Goods declared as decorative glass stones ... ... ... ... ..... be a clear finding regarding the nature of the glass materials so as to attract the provisions of Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962 read with Section 3(2) of the Imports and Exports Control Act, 1947. In other words, there must be a finding as to which category the confiscated materials belongs under the sub-heading mentioned in Chapter 70 of the Customs Tariff Act. Under the circumstances, the matter has to be remanded to the first respondent to allow the petitioner to adduce evidence regarding the nature of the matter and determine whether the goods seized come within the purview of the descriptions mentioned in Chapter 70 of the Customs Tariff Act. 8. In the result, the writ petition is allowed and the matter is remanded to the first respondent for fresh disposal after affording the petitioner an opportunity to adduce evidence regarding the nature of the materials seized and dispose of the matter in accordance with law. There will, however, be no order as to costs.
-
1988 (12) TMI 117 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Prosecution - Bail amount - Customs Recovery of contraband - Accused released on bail ... ... ... ... ..... itnesses who are to be cross-examined after charge, the remaining witnesses would not be more in number and the case can be concluded within a short duration of time. This appears to be so and therefore when the trial is to be concluded within a short time the contention of the petitioner that he has to remain in custody indefinitely would not exist. Shri Kamat, the learned Counsel, no doubt submitted that his client s remaining in custody as he is not able to avail of bail is likely to entail into consequences of compelling his client to plead guilty to the charge as according to him the co-accused who faced with similar situation pleaded guilty to the charge. It is difficult to accept the validity of this argument for obvious reasons and no further comments are necessary. 4. All said and done, no case has been made for interference. The criminal case pending before the learned Magistrate to proceed further expeditiously as already directed by this Court. Petition rejected.
............
|
