|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 81 to 100 of 178 Records
-
1989 (6) TMI 105
... ...
... ... ..... ections to the authority against whose decision the appeal is preferred to dispose of the whole or any part of the matter afresh, unless forbidden from doing so by statute. Often times omission may amount to an error. In our opinion the lower appellate authority committed an error in not giving any finding with regard to the value of equity shares held by the assessee trust though specific grounds were taken before him. Ultimately, we hold that the appeal of the Revenue should be allowed and the matter should be remitted to the Dy. CIT for the purpose of determining, according to law, the correct value of each equity share held by the assessee trust in Sundaram Fasteners Ltd. by applying break up value method. The Dy. CIT is directed to consider the arguments of the assessee which may be advanced before him, as well as the arguments advanced before us, and dispose of the appeal grounds Nos. 10 to 13 which were preferred before him but which were left undecided by him earlier.
-
1989 (6) TMI 104
... ...
... ... ..... d is that dt. 29th March, 1988 in respect of which we have already pointed out the appellant had stated in correspondence that no appeal was filed and in respect of which the time for filing an appeal is over. Again for the sake of completeness, we would state that occasion had arisen for this Bench to consider whether the Tribunal was competent to condone delay in presenting appeals after the period mentioned in s. 269G and in our order in IT Acq. No. 38/Mds/88 dt. 26th Oct., 1988 where we had come to the conclusion that we have no powers to do so. (A copy of the aforesaid order forms Annexure lsquo H rsquo to this order). Therefore, the question of our entertaining the appeal filed on 26th May, 1989 with reference to the order dt. 29th March, 1988 does not arise. This being the position, our conclusion is that the appeal filed on 26th May, 1989 and which is now under our consideration is incompetent in law and, therefore, has to be dismissed in limine as being incomepetent.
-
1989 (6) TMI 100
Assessment Year, In Part, Partnership Deed, Two Partners ... ... ... ... ..... ion. In this case, it appears that some of the partners not only made a secret profit, but made the same without the knowledge of the other partners. This cannot be described as a change in the constitution of the firm or a change in the profit sharing ratio of the partners. 7. Applying the ratio of the aforementioned decisions, it may be seen that the mere fact that one of the partners Shri P.K. Das had made a secret profit without the assent and knowledge of the other partner would not have the effect of changing the constitution of the firm or changing the profit sharing ratio of these two partners. In the absence of these conditions, we are of the considered opinion that the firm is entitled to the continuation of registration under sec. 184(7) of the Income-tax Act.The same view has been taken by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) in his order dated 30-5-1986 and the same, therefore, does not call for any interference. 8. In the result, these appeals are dismissed.
-
1989 (6) TMI 99
Assessment Year, Income From House Property, Income From Letting Out, Income From Other Sources, Income From Property, Plant And Machinery
-
1989 (6) TMI 96
... ...
... ... ..... e clearly observed that if the assessment is based, fully or partly, on any material covered by the ITO from outside without observing there about the rules of natural justice, it is an illegality and of no effect. Any order that is made in violation of rules of natural justice is not a proper order. The first Appellate Authority shall necessarily have to pass speaking order so as to prevent unconscious, unfairness or arbitrariness in reaching his conclusions. 12. The first Appellate Authority is, therefore, directed to re-hear the appeal afresh in the light of our observation above, in respect of each of the items specified above and also specifically deal with various Grounds as have been raised by the assessee in his grounds before us Nos. 1 to 29. We, accordingly, set aside the order of the First Appellate Authority and direct him to re-hear the appeal afresh as per directions contained above. 13. In the result, the appeals are treated as allowed for statistical purposes.
-
1989 (6) TMI 94
Family Arrangement ... ... ... ... ..... C.S. Suresh could have justifiably questioned his mother Sona Bai and elder brother Shamlal as to why should he be deprived of any share in the property bequeathed by their ancestor Ram Pershad particularly when such intention of the testator could not be inferred or evidenced primarily for the reason that C. S. Suresh was not even born at the time of the execution of the Will to be argued that he was intentionally and consciously excluded from getting any share out of the huge estate ? The mother or elder son were luckily able to see beyond their nose and persuade themselves to enter upon an arrangement in the existing form and thus save a situation that might have taken a catastrophic turn, besides being ostensibly inequitable. 24. In the result, we are wholly unable to find any blemish in the view taken by the learned first appellate authority holding the family arrangement dated 21-3-1980 as a valid document and since fully acted upon. Revenue fails. Appeal is dismissed.
-
1989 (6) TMI 93
Assessment Year, Attributable To, Industrial Company ... ... ... ... ..... the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case mentioned above that the entire activity in the present case constituted an integrated activity. 12. In this view of the matter, the order of the CIT(A) impugned before us cannot be sustained. The order of the ITO on this point is restored. In the cross objections, the common point of the assessee is that the appeals by the revenue were time barred and should be dismissed as such. We have heard both the sides simultaneously on this point and we have given our opinion in the preceding paragraphs in which the delay of few days were condoned by us on facts. 13. The next common point raised in the cross objections is only to support the order of the CIT(A) which we have dealt with in the preceding paragraphs. In view of what we have decided in the departmental appeals, the cross objections have become infructuous which we hereby dismiss as such. 14. In the result, the appeals by the revenue are allowed and the cross objections are dismissed.
-
1989 (6) TMI 92
Appellate Authority, Assessee's Appeal, Dispose Of ... ... ... ... ..... appear or failed to appear before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner has the obligation to dispose of the appeal on merits and not to dismiss the same solely on the ground that the assessee was not serious in pursuing the appeal. Thus, the orders of the CIT (Appeals) impugned before us cannot be said to be valid and legal keeping in mind the principles enunciated by higher courts. The orders of the CIT (Appeals) cannot, therefore, be sustained which we hereby set aside for fresh disposal by him after giving the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. If the appeals required to be disposed of ex parte on some reason or the other, the CIT (Appeals) would please dispose of the appeals on merits and by passing a speaking order as such orders are appealable. The CIT (Appeals) please give reasonable opportunity of being heard to both the sides. 6. In the result, the appeals by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purpose.
-
1989 (6) TMI 91
Charitable Or Religious Trust ... ... ... ... ..... 13. Thus cn all the points raised by the Revenue to deny exemption to the assessee, we find that their understanding of the law and the provisions of the will, according to us, was not in a proper perspective. The learned Judicial Member, in our opinion, is not right in taking the view that the trust still enures partly for personal purposes and not existing wholly for charitable or religious purposes. We do not wish to express any opinion of the question of treating the sum paid to Shri Tapan Chakravorty as falling for assessment under section 161 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 because that was not a point of difference of opinion referred to us, in any case not covered by the reference made to us. 14. For the above reasons, we are of the view that the assessee-trust is entitled to exemption under the Income-tax Act, 1961 and denial of exemption is not proper. 15. The matter will now go before the regular Bench for deciding the appeals according to the opinion of the majority.
-
1989 (6) TMI 90
Assessment Year, Industrial Undertaking ... ... ... ... ..... be deemed to be partners in such partnership firms. The same anology would apply to a partnership firm, which authorises one or more of its partners to enter into a partnership with others and the rest of the partners or the partnership as a body cannot, in law, be deemed to have become partners of the firm, which such partners constitute with third parties. In our view, therefore, the assessee cannot be deemed to be a partner of the firm, M/s Kishan Flour Mills to which the industrial undertaking belongs nor can the said industrial undertaking be deemed to belong to the firm M/s Sumat Prasad Jain and Co., of which the assessee is a partner. We, therefore, agree with the authorities below that the assessee was not entitled to exemption under sec. 5(1)(xxxii) of the Wealth-tax Act. 9. The assessee having failed on the main issue, the consequential contention regarding the quantification of the amount of exemption becomes redundant. 10. In the result, the appeals are dismissed.
-
1989 (6) TMI 89
Assessment Year ... ... ... ... ..... ot been brought by the legislature within the ambit of the definition of the term income . The perusal of commentary by Sampat and Iyengar on Casual and Non-recurring receipts, the learned author on page 750 of his treatise -- Vol. I, 7th Edition has written as under -- Generally speaking, in judging the quality of the receipt, in the absence of any reference to it in the contract of employment or professional engagement, the position of both the payer and payee should be considered. It would be open to the recipient to prove that the payer made the payment for some extraneous purpose, other than remuneration, it is proper to consider the quality of the receipt from the standpoint of the recipient. 9. Looking to the totality of the circumstances and peculiar facts in the background of this dispute, the sum of US Dollar 5,000 received by Prof. Menon could not be subjected to tax. Action of the CIT (Appeals) is hereby reversed and in the result the assessee s appeal is allowed.
-
1989 (6) TMI 88
Advance Tax, Assessed Income, Assessment Year, False Estimate ... ... ... ... ..... penalty should be reduced to minimum because we find in the order passed by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner (Assessment) that the assessee though obliged to file statement of advance tax on the basis of latest completed assessment, it chose to file estimate on lower income estimating only an amount of Rs. 10,000 especially when there was reason to believe that the income could be estimated at much higher rate. We also find that the assessee has not filed any revised estimate even at the time of second instalment due in September, 1982 showing higher income, which could throw some light on the conduct of the assessee. Again the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner has specifically stated that even after filing the estimate the assessee did not make full payment of advance tax as per the revised estimate which again throws ample light on the conduct of the assessee and intentions behind filing the estimate as filed from time to time. 9. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1989 (6) TMI 87
Assessment Year ... ... ... ... ..... rsion that have taken place prior to that date and which had been considered and accepted by the authorities of the revenue cannot be called in question merely because these provisions have come on the statute book. 12. It is abundantly clear that on the basis of the market value adopted by the assessee in the asst. year 1980-81 the commercial results for the flats sold during the year were declared. In so far as these results are concerned, the assessing authority accepted them but for tinkering with the market value which was to be taken on the date of conversion and which, in fact, was considered and accepted in the assessment order for 1980-81. Therefore, the whole exercise done by the IAC(A) was not warranted either on facts or in law. We, therefore, set aside the orders of the authorities below and direct the IAC(A) to accept the commercial results declared on the sale of flats/sheds since he had not otherwise questioned the results. Ordered accordingly. Appeal allowed.
-
1989 (6) TMI 86
... ...
... ... ..... As rightly pointed out by the learned Accountant Member it is not that every explanation given by the assessee must be accepted as correct howsoever fantastic it is. The explanation must be an acceptable explanation to a fact-finding body. The approval of this statement of law made by the Patna High Court, by the Supreme Court is very relevant and significant in this case. I am of the opinion that the assessee had not discharged the onus that lay on him and that the explanation offered by the assessee was not bona fide and that all the facts relating to the same and the material to the computation of total income were not truly disclosed by the assessee. The penalty is therefore leviable and was rightly imposed. 13. I am, however, of the opinion that in respect of the sum of Rs. 9,000 for the reasons given by the CIT(A) with whom I agree, the penalty is not leviable. 14. The matter will now go before the Regular Bench for disposal of the appeals according to majority opinion.
-
1989 (6) TMI 85
... ...
... ... ..... o Shri Subhash Chandra in the hands of the assessee firm. The same has to be upheld in view of what has been held for the asst. yrs. 1975-76. ITA No, 3036/Del/1985 22. The ITO had initiated penalty proceedings under s. 271(1)(C) for the asst. yr. 1976-77 with reference to the additions of Rs. 40,163 (assessed income Rs. 54,323 returned income Rs, 14,160). On that basis he had levied a penalty of Rs. 40,000. 23. In appeal, the learned CIT(A) noticing that the additions of Rs. 21,297 and Rs. 20,000 had been deleted, cancelling the penalty holding that the very basis for the levy of the penalty had been taken away. 24. After considering the rival submissions and in view of the fact that deletion of the additions had been upheld, the order of the learned CIT(A) has also to be similarly upheld. 25. In the result, the departments appeals Nos. ITA 748 to 754 and 3036/Del/1985 fail and are dismissed whereas the cross-objection Nos. 77 and 78/Del/87 filed by the assessee are allowed.
-
1989 (6) TMI 84
Investment Allowance, Appellate Tribunal ... ... ... ... ..... ical, viz. for maintenance of the cars. The cars have been maintained for business purpose and the fact that part of the expenses would be attributed to personal use of the cars by the directors would mean that said part of the expenditure constituted perquisites or benefit to the directors. Sec. 40(c) of the Act empowers the ITO to disallow the expenditure which results in remuneration benefit or amenities to the directors, if the said expenditure was in excess of the limits prescribed under the said provision. Consequently, in the present case, the above mentioned two amounts of Rs. 10,538 and Rs. 8,627 for A.Ys. 1982-83 and 1983-84 respectively would be liable to be included in the computation under sec. 40(c) of the Act, for working out the disallowance. We accordingly, set aside the orders of the ITO and the CIT(A) On this item and direct the ITO to include these amounts in the computation for disallowance u/s 40(c) of the Act. 29. In the result, the appeals are allowed.
-
1989 (6) TMI 83
... ...
... ... ..... to the ratio of the above decisions and keeping in view the fact that the pasteurised milk bottled by the assessee and marketted by it is a commercial commodity distinct from the raw material out of which it is produced, we hold that the assessee is entitled to the benefits of investment allowance under s. 32A of the Act. The ITO is directed to allow the claim if the assessee otherwise satisfies the other conditions. 8. The last ground is in regard to claim of status of industrial company. In view of our order in regard to the claim of investment allowance, the ITO is directed to reconsider the claim of the assessee for the statute of industrial company. For this purpose, the order of the learned CIT(A) is set aside on this point and the matter is restored to the file of the assessing ITO for fresh decision in the light of our order and after giving full opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its claim. 9. For statistical purpose, the appeal shall be treated as allowed.
-
1989 (6) TMI 82
... ...
... ... ..... ve held as under. The question to be considered is whether there was accrual of liability in the assessment year, though with facility of a deferred payment or annual accrual of limited liability in the assessment year with similar accrual of liability in the following four years. Clause 5 clearly provides for consideration of Rs. 1,00,000 for what the German collaborators are supposed to provide to the assessee bearing in mind the system of accounting followed by the assessee. It has to be concluded that the entire amount of Rs. 1,00,000 was deductible in this year. As we have revenue expenditure, we will have to uphold the Tribunal s order and conclusions contained therein in the entirety. 5.2. In vie of the aforesaid discussions, we hold that the CIT (A) rightly deleted the disallowance of Rs. 2,55,000 made by the assessing authority out of technical know how fees claimed as a deduction by the assessee. 6. In the result the appeal submitted by the department is dismissed.
-
1989 (6) TMI 81
... ...
... ... ..... polishing and of furniture amounting to Rs.1,603 being allowable and allowed under s. 31 of the Act could not be disallowed under the provisions of sub-s. (3) of s. 37 of the Act or rules made thereunder. Since the assessee in this case claimed that part of the expenses debited under the maintenance of guest house would be allowable under ss. 30 to 36 of the Act and on which the provisions of s. 37(4) would not have application have not been looked into either by the learned CIT(A) or the learned assessing officer, we consider it necessary to set aside this point and restore the matter to the file of the assessing officer with a direction that he will re-examine the matter in the light of the above decision and re-compute the disallowance in accordance with law after giving ample opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The order on this point is accordingly set aside for fresh decision as indicated above. 12. In the result, the appeal shall be treated as partly allowed.
-
1989 (6) TMI 80
... ...
... ... ..... n the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in holding that the flight kitchen doing the business of preparing food for supply to Airlines was an industrial undertaking eligible for investment allowance, ESA and relief under s. 80-J. 60. After some discussions with the parties it has been ascertained that similar issue had arisen in respect of the asst. yr. 1978-79 and the matter is pending before the Hon ble Supreme Court in the assessee s own case on the transfer of appeal as per the directions of the Hon ble Supreme Court. Under the circumstances, we set aside the orders of the IT authorities on this issue and restore the master once more to the file of the IAC (Asst) with a direction to adjust the assessment in the light of the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court when pronounced on this issue. The IAC is further directed to give an opportunity of being heard to the assessee in this regard. 61. In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed.
|
