|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 121 to 140 of 242 Records
-
1993 (4) TMI 135 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA
... ...
... ... ..... e contrary decision of the Assistant Collector cannot be countenanced. This aspect of the matter was totally missed by the Collector (Appeals) while deciding the appeal of the respondents before him. He had tarred all the appeals with the same brush of amended Section 11 B which, as discussed by us, was at once premature and inappropriate in the present case. 8. For the foregoing reasons, we allow the appeal by remand to the Collector (Appeals). The matter should be decided de novo after considering the submissions of the present respondents, and keeping note of the earlier valid direction of the Collector (Appeals) in terms of the order-in-appeal dated 2-11-1982. This order does not get whittled down by the fact that the exemption Notification in question has been rescinded during the long interregnum between the said date and the Assistant Collector rsquo s subsequent decision. The Tribunal rsquo s order in the M. R.F. cases cited by the learned Counsel may be kept in mind.
-
1993 (4) TMI 134 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit ... ... ... ... ..... lms to deposit Rs. 30,000/-, Shri Pramod B. Agarwal Rs. 20,000/-. In respect of Shri Jyoti Kumar Agarwal, we dispense with the whole amount of pre-deposit. We order that the applicants should deposit the above amounts within 10 weeks from today and report compliance of the same to the Tribunal within 11 weeks. We further order that during the pendency of the appeal, the revenue authorities shall not pursue the recovery proceedings for the balance amount of penalty. In case the applicants fail to comply with the terms of this Order, this stay Order shall stand automatically vacated. 4. During the course of hearing, learned Advocate, Shri Rawal had made a prayer for out of turn hearing of the main appeal as the goods are under detention and the Bench pointed out that the appellants are first to cross the hurdle of the provision of Section 129E of the Customs Act, 1962. Thereafter, the appellants are at liberty to approach the Tribunal for out of turn hearing, if they so choose.
-
1993 (4) TMI 133 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Natural Justice ... ... ... ... ..... ur of the witness and clear up his doubts during the course of the argument and the party appearing to persuade the authority by reasoned argument to accept his point of view. But, if one person hears and another decides, then personal hearing becomes an empty formality and such a procedure offends the basic principle of judicial procedure. rdquo 8. In view of the above discussion, we hold that the impugned order shows non-application of mind and in passing the order the adjudicating authority had failed to observe the principles of natural justice. 9. We, therefore, set aside the impugned order and order passed by the Assistant Collector in pursuance of the directions given to him by the Collector and remand the matter to the concerned authority for de novo adjudication in accordance with law after granting an opportunity to the appellants to be heard. Since the matter is quite old we shall appreciate if it is decided within 4 months of the date of the receipt of this order.
-
1993 (4) TMI 132 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Confiscation of currency ... ... ... ... ..... n Singh have claimed ownership of the currency which they state was sent through Shri Shashi Bhushan to one Dalip Singh in Amritsar and their claims have been disbelieved only on the ground that the claimants could not disclose the denominations of the currency notes. We find that the details of the currency have been furnished by Inderjit Singh. We agree with the lower appellate authority that the Department has not discharged the burden of proof cast upon it under Section 121 in this case which is entirely built upon the statement of Shashi Bhushan. This piece of evidence is not sufficient in establishing any relationship between the seized currency and the respondents. The ingredients for establishing contravention of Section 121 have not been satisfied in the instant case. Therefore, we see no reason to interfere with the impugned order. 5. In the result we uphold the impugned order and reject the appeals and direct release of the seized currency to the claimants thereof.
-
1993 (4) TMI 131 - CEGAT, BOMBAY
Demand - Limitation ... ... ... ... ..... t setting it aside by due process of law. Besides that, there is also a trade notice No. 80/84, dated 28-12-1984 issued by the Chandigarh Collectorate providing for maintaining RG 1 Register at the stage when yarn attains the form in which it is to be cleared from the factory and it is cleared in the spindle form. As the demand is apparently time-barred, detailed discussion on merits however is not called for. 8. Under the circumstances, none of the demands raised and order confirming the same could be sustained and the order in that regard is set aside. 9. Penal provisions vide Rule 173Q of the Rules also cannot be attracted here because, no duty evasion is proved. Even on alleged shortage for which demand is held as time-barred, on merits also the same could not have been sustained. The penalty therefore appears to be not justified and cannot be sustained. 10. In the result, the appeal is allowed and order of the authority below is set aside. Consequential relief to follow.
-
1993 (4) TMI 130 - ITAT PUNE
... ...
... ... ..... CIT drew the ITO s attention to a particular fact that required him to examine it, it does not amount to a direction given to the ITO so as to say that the ITO had not applied his mind. For these reasons, I hold that there was a failure on the part of the assessees to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment in the original returns filed for the asst. yr. 1978-79. 24. Now, the last point of difference is whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the reassessment under s. 147(a) is justified in law or not. I have sufficiently discussed this issue while expressing my opinion on point No. 3 and since points Nos. 3 and 4 converge on the same issue, and for the reasons given therein, I hold that, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the reassessments under s. 147(a) are justified in law. 25. The matter will now go before the regular Bench for disposal of the appeals in accordance with the opinion of the majority on these points.
-
1993 (4) TMI 127 - ITAT PUNE
Investment Allowance ... ... ... ... ..... he claim of investment allowance on fire extinguishers and time-office equipment was rejected on the ground that they were not inextricably connected with the production of any article or thing and they were not plant or machinery installed for the purpose of business of construction, manufacture or production of any article or thing. Although the nature of the items has been furnished, the function or role played by each and every item in the manufacture of computer systems has not been furnished. We are satisfied that there is no nexus or connection inextricable with the production or manufacture of computer systems so as to warrant a conclusion that they are plant or machinery so as to be eligible for depreciation at 100 per cent thereon. Therefore, we do not agree with the reasons and conclusion of the CIT (A) on this issue and therefore its decision on this point is reversed and that of the Assessing Officer is restored. 13. In the result, the appeals are partly allowed.
-
1993 (4) TMI 126 - ITAT PUNE
Investment Allowance ... ... ... ... ..... . Ltd. relied upon by the learned departmental representative, went by the theory of nexus or close connection or inextricable connection with the business of construction, manufacture or production of any article or thing. It may be recalled that with reference to electrification machinery, their Lordships of Calcutta High Court have not answered the question referred, but the matter was remanded to the Tribunal for decision whether having regard to the nature and function of the machinery installed, such machinery could be termed as plant. In other words, the nature and function for every plant and machinery was required to be considered before deciding the issue whether investment allowance was admissible or not. In our opinion, the Bombay, Calcutta and Gujarat High Court decisions would support the case of the assessee and therefore, we uphold the order of the CIT (Appeals) on this issue and reject the ground taken by the revenue. 9. In the result, the appeal is dismissed
-
1993 (4) TMI 121 - ITAT MADRAS-D
Assessing Officer, Association Of Persons, Body Of Individuals, Discretionary Trust, Representative Assessee
-
1993 (4) TMI 119 - ITAT MADRAS-B
Depreciation ... ... ... ... ..... e accordingly set aside the impugned order in revision on this issue and restore that of the Assessing Officer. 29. That leaves for consideration the question whether the assessee is entitled to extra shift allowance. From the short order in revision it is seen that the Commissioner of Income-tax concluded that the assessee was not entitled to extra shift allowance simply because he had held that the assessee was not entitled to extra depreciation. For a fact the Commissioner of Income-tax has not discussed this aspect of the matter at all. Be that as it may, the fact of the matter is that all along the assessee was allowed the benefit of extra shift allowance. We, therefore, hold that the assessee is entitled to extra shift allowance to the extent admissible under Appendix I Part I item III(iv) of the Income-tax Rules, 1962. The Assessing Officer may look into this aspect of the matter. 30. In the result, for statistical purposes, the assessee s appeal is treated as allowed.
-
1993 (4) TMI 116 - ITAT JAIPUR
Assessing Officer, Assessment Of Income, Assessment Order, Assessment Proceedings, Legal Representative, Set On
-
1993 (4) TMI 115 - ITAT JAIPUR
Assessment Order, Claiming Depreciation, Penalty Notice, Show-cause Notice ... ... ... ... ..... le. In these circumstances, the WDV had to be adopted and it had to be increased by any additions to the assets during the year and then depreciation had to be allowed on that figure. 10. The next objection of the assessee is regarding addition of Rs. 22,500 on account of sale of scrap. Since we have directed that the book results of the assessee had to be accepted, it would imply that since assessee had reduced its cost of operation by the amount of a sale proceeds of the scrap, no separate additions for sale of scrap can be made. 11. Next objection of the assessee is regarding allowance of interest paid to creditors. Since no material has been brought on record to show that the money on which the interest was paid was not utilised for purposes of assessee s business, no disallowance for payment of interest could be made. 12. Accordingly, except for Ground No. 1(c) all the objections of the assessee in Grounds of Appeal are allowed and, thus, the appeal stands partly allowed
-
1993 (4) TMI 114 - ITAT HYDERABAD-B
... ...
... ... ..... eniently divided for convenient enjoyment. Taking into consideration the surrounding circumstances, the consideration cannot be said to be inadequate. In CGT vs. Indo Traders and Agencies (Madras) Pvt. Ltd. (1981) 131 ITR 313 (Mad) the Madras High Court while considering a case arising under s. 4(1)(a) of the GT Act held that if the consideration which passed between the parties can be considered to be reasonable or fair it cannot be said to be inadequate, that adequate consideration is not necessarily what is ultimately determined by someone else as market value and that unless the price was so low to shock the conscience of the Court it would not be possible to hold that the transaction is otherwise than for adequate consideration. 9. Seen from any view of the matter, the gift-tax assessments made by the GTO against the appellants are unjustified and are liable to be set aside. Accordingly, the said assessments are cancelled. 10. In the result, both the appeals are allowed.
-
1993 (4) TMI 113 - ITAT HYDERABAD-B
Penalty For Concealment, Concealment Of Income ... ... ... ... ..... assessee to substantiate such a plea in the penalty proceedings, independently, even after the close of the assessment proceedings. This is clearly wrong under law and for this reason also, penalty cannot be sustained. Several decisions cited by both sides are held to be not germane as they cannot be applied to the penalty proceedings of 1982-83 which are to be governed by section 271(1)(c), Explanations 1 to 6 which are in vogue from 1-4-1976 onwards. The earlier Explanation, as already discussed above, was considered to be only a procedural provision and not a substantive provision. Therefore, the decisions rendered with reference to that Explanation cannot be of much help to decide the penalties for concealment falling on or after 1-4-1976. Therefore, since the Tribunal does not want to burden its record any further, it wanted to observe that those decisions do not apply. 6. In the result, the appeal of the department is found to be without merit and hence it is dismissed.
-
1993 (4) TMI 112 - ITAT HYDERABAD-B
Assessing Officer, Business Income, Business Profits, Interest Payments, Rejection Of Accounts
-
1993 (4) TMI 111 - ITAT GAUHATI
Assessing Officer, Surtax Liability, Tax Liability, Tax Proceedings, Total Income ... ... ... ... ..... the claim for deduction of the surtax liability. 20. The next point to be considered as to what order should be passed on the merits of the additional ground. The papers filed before us show that the assessee has submitted a return of chargeable profits under the Surtax Act on 28-12-1987. This prima facie establishes that the assessee is liable to pay surtax. It cannot be a gainsaid that the liability is a statutory liability. However, we do not know and no materials were placed before us to show whether any assessment has been made under the Surtax Act and what is the ultimate or eventual liability of the assessee. We, therefore, consider that the proper order to be passed in this case is to remand the claim to the file of the Assessing Officer who will ascertain the exact amount of surtax liability and apply the law laid down by the Hon ble Gauhati High Court in Doom Dooma Tea Co. Ltd. s case regarding the allowabality of the claim. 21. The cross objection is partly allowed
-
1993 (4) TMI 110 - ITAT GAUHATI
Appellate Authority, Delay In Filing Appeal, Late Filing, Orders Passed ... ... ... ... ..... , however harsh it may appear to be. Respectfully following the principles laid down in the aforementioned decisions of the Hon ble Supreme Court and the Tribunal, we have no hesitation In holding that penalty orders passed on 29-3-1990 under section 271(1)(c) of the Act were beyond the period of limitation. The CIT(A) was wrong in holding otherwise. 6. In view of our decision that the penalty orders were passed beyond the period of limitation, and are therefore invalid, it is not necessary for us to adjudicate on the other grounds taken in the cross objections on the basis of the decision of the Honble Guwahati High Court in Sri Brajalal Bank v. State of Tripura 1989 2 GIR 220. 7. Similarly, in view of our decision as stated above, we do not think it necessary to go into the grounds raised by the Department in its appeals regarding the cancellation of the penalty on merits. In the result, the cross objections are partly allowed and the appeals by the Department are dismissed
-
1993 (4) TMI 109 - ITAT DELHI-C
... ...
... ... ..... value of property and whether there is difference of more than 15/25 between the two. In the present case, as noted earlier, the Assessing Officer did not take into account correct apparent consideration, had no relevant material to determine fair market value so as to have reason to believe that the same exceeded the apparent consideration by a particular figure or percentage. The acquisition proceedings are penal in character and, therefore, conditions required for initiation of valid proceedings must be fully satisfied. From the material on record and for the reasons given above we hold that, in this case, the conditions for initiation of valid proceedings are far from satisfied. Therefore, we hold that the initiation of proceedings in this case is bad in law. We quash the notice issued by the Competent Authority under s. 269D of IT Act. The acquisition order is accordingly held to be bad in law and without jurisdiction and is cancelled. In the result, appeals are allowed.
-
1993 (4) TMI 108 - ITAT DELHI-C
Appealable Orders ... ... ... ... ..... emedy provided for in sub-section (2) of section 143 is not available to the assessee and the assessee is not obliged or can be compelled to seek the remedy provided for in sub-section (2). Thereafter to seek remedy against an assessment made in violation of sub-section (1) is either under section 264 or under section 246. It is from this point of view that I am inclined to agree with the view expressed by the learned Judicial Member. The Income-tax Officer in this case has changed the status of the assessee and applied a different rate of tax by applying different provisions of the Income-tax Act, which were not the adjustments referred to in clause (b) of section 143(1). Therefore the redressal for such an assessment has to be taken by filing an appeal before the Appellate Asstt. Commissioner. I therefore agree with the view expressed by the learned Judicial Member. 6. The matter will now go back to the regular Bench for decision of the appeal according to majority opinion.
-
1993 (4) TMI 107 - ITAT DELHI-B
Earned Income, Expenditure Incurred, Income From Other Sources, Interest Income, Set Off, Short-term Deposits
............
|
