|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 61 to 80 of 553 Records
-
2004 (6) TMI 583 - ITAT DELHI
Deduction, Commissioner (Appeals) ... ... ... ... ..... . The above view is also supported by Special Bench decision of the ITAT in the case of International Research Park Laboratories Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT 1994 50 ITD 37 (Delhi). Even otherwise, having regard to commonality of management, funds and administration of two businesses, we hold that consultancy and software business was same business and therefore, total turnover of entire business is required to be taken into consideration. Accordingly we uphold the computation under section 80HHE of the Income-tax Act. However, for considering claim under section 10A, the matter is remitted to the file of the learned CIT(A). 14. The assessee has also raised objection to charging of interest under section 234B of the Income-tax Act. However, during the course of hearing of appeal, this ground of appeal was stated to be consequential. We, therefore, only direct for re-computation of interest on the finally determined income. 15. In the result, the appeal is allowed in terms stated above.
-
2004 (6) TMI 582 - ITAT DELHI
Business expenditure ... ... ... ... ..... ok, wherein the PAN of the ladies have been given, had discharged the onus put on it by virtue of the provisions of section 68, because in the present case it was the share application money and not the cash credits. Even otherwise, both the ladies being Income-tax assessees and the amount having been received by cheques, there was no question of making any addition in the hands of the assessee. If the revenue authorities were not satisfied with the capacity of the ladies, then action could have been taken in their personal hands when the revenue has not alleged that the deposits in the bank account of the ladies were made by the assessee. In view of the above facts and circumstances, I am of the opinion that the addition of Rs. 5 lakhs having been sustained by the CIT (Appeals) on conjectures and surmises without appreciating the factual position as well as the provisions of law, cannot be sustained. The same is deleted. 16. In the result, assessee rsquo s appeal is allowed.
-
2004 (6) TMI 581 - ITAT DELHI
Diversion of Income ... ... ... ... ..... bills have been issued by the assessee company and the claims for excise duty drawback as per the excise duty rules have been made by the assessee company on the basis of the exports made during the year. In the backdrop of these facts, we do not have the slightest reservation nor any ground to hold that the income on account of duty drawback accrued to the assessee and is liable to be included in the total income of the assessee. Now regarding the claim of the assessee that the amount received towards duty drawback has been passed on to its sister concern M/s. JB Exports, this would not detract the factum of accrual of the amount in the hands of the assessee company. Merely because the accrued receipt is diverted would not ipso facto extinguish the factum of accrual. For these reasons, we are inclined to uphold the action of the CIT(A) in sustaining the addition of Rs. 5,47,968 and dismiss the appeal of the assessee. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.
-
2004 (6) TMI 580 - ITAT DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... g the course of hearing before me, the ld. Authorised Representative of the assessee argued that all the assessee rsquo s donors were identifiable and each one of them was being regularly assessed to tax. During the course of hearing before the Commissioner (Appeals), the assessee had filed various documents relating to the income-tax returns filed by the donors, their address and gift-tax challans. The assessee had also produced copies of gift deeds and Affidavits from the donors. The ld. Commissioner (Appeals) was not justified in ignoring the above evidences furnished by the assessee. On a perusal of the paper book, I find considerable force in this contention. The assessee has furnished considerable materials in support of the identity of the donors and also established that all of them were assessed to tax. I, therefore, direct deletion of the addition of Rs. 93,000 and allow the appeal filed by the assessee. 5. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.
-
2004 (6) TMI 579 - ITAT DELHI
Capital gains ... ... ... ... ..... A) in directing the Assessing Officer to decide the matter afresh as per law by 31-3-2001 after giving opportunity to the assessee, on the various issues raised by the Revenue regarding assessment of interest as well as additional compensation etc. We have already adjudicated the issues as above regarding the figure of enhanced compensation as well as correct amount of accrued interest to be adopted in the various assessment years, we have upheld the approach of the Assessing Officer. However, the Assessing Officer has been directed by us to reconcile the discrepancies in respect of the figures of additional compensation and interest. We feel that direction of the CIT(A) to decide the matter afresh by 31st March, 2001 is clearly without jurisdiction and competence and the same is therefore quashed. 13. The grievance of the Revenue projected in the common grounds is thus disposed of as above. 14. For the aforesaid reasons the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed as above.
-
2004 (6) TMI 578 - ITAT NEW DELHI
Business expenditure, Investment allowance ... ... ... ... ..... red in holding that only 50 per cent of the expenses on account of rent etc. of premises in the F.E. Division and for the purpose of business as against 25 per cent adopted by the Assessing Officer and in allowing a relief of Rs. 88,564. 199. This ground is against the CIT(A) rsquo s order holding that expenses onrent etc. in the Farm Equipment Division of the assessee company towards providing premises to its employees be taken at 50 per cent of such expenses instead of 25 per cent adopted by the Assessing Officer. 200. As pointed out in foregoing paragraphs, the assessee is also in appeal vide Ground No. 6 in ITA No. 4773/Del./92 for the assessment year under consideration. This ground has been considered and decided while dealing with the grounds of appeal of the assessee. After considering the arguments from both the sides, we have upheld the order of CIT(A). 201. In view of the above, the assessee rsquo s appeal is partly allowed and the Departmental appeal is dismissed.
-
2004 (6) TMI 577 - ITAT DELHI
Entertainment expenditure, Business expenditure ... ... ... ... ..... that similar issue arose for consideration in assessee rsquo s case for the assessment year 1991-92 ITA No. 2245/Del./99 and this Tribunal had allowed the claim for deduction on account of club membership fees of Dr. Sella, MD. while the claim for deduction on account of income tax liability of the M.D. borne by the assessee was disallowed by the Tribunal. Respectfully following the decisions referred to above and for the reasons stated in the aforesaid appeals, the second ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed while the fourth ground of appeal of the assessee is dismissed. 24. The third ground of appeal of the assessee was not pressed at the time of hearing and the same is dismissed as not pressed. 25. Ground Nos. 5 and 5.1 have already been considered while considering ground No. 3 of the grounds of appeal of the Revenue. For the reasons stated therein these grounds of appeal of the assessee are allowed. 26. In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed.
-
2004 (6) TMI 576 - CESTAT, CHENNAI
Redemption fine and penalty - Quantum of ... ... ... ... ..... ve examined the matter in detail and have found that the adjudicating authority did not exercise its discretion correctly in determining the fine under Section 125 and the penalty under Section 112 of the Customs Act. In view of the factual similarity of the two cases, we record the same finding in the instant case. 4. emsp A redemption fine of Rs. 16 lakhs is exorbitant vis-a-vis the value of the goods (over Rs. 38,00,000/-). In the case of Sai Shakti Enterprises, the fine was to the tune of Rs. 3.6 lakhs where the value of the goods was about Rs. 24 lakhs. We reduced the fine to Rs. 2 lakhs in that case. Employing the same yardstick, we reduce the quantum of redemption fine in the instant case to Rs. 8 lakhs. In the earlier case, we reduced the penalty from Rs. 2.4 lakhs to Rs. 50,000/-. Similarly, we reduce the penalty in this case to Rs. 1,50,000/-. With this modification, the order of the Commissioner stands affirmed. 5. emsp The appeal is disposed of in the above terms.
-
2004 (6) TMI 575 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... ground that Hon rsquo ble Madras High Court in the case of Beauty Dyers v. Union of India and Ors. reported in 2004 (166) E.L.T. 27 (Mad.) 2002 (52) RLT 635 set aside the rules formulated under the Compounded Levy Scheme. 4. emsp The contention of the Revenue is that Hon rsquo ble Madras High Court set aside the rules i.e. Hot Air Stenter Independent Textiles Processors Annual Capacity Determination Rules whereas the present case relates to compounded levy on iron and steel and governed by separate set of Rules. 5. emsp In view of the decision of Hon rsquo ble Madras High Court is not in respect of hot re-rolling Annual Determination Rules, therefore, the finding of Commissioner (Appeals) in this regard is not sustainable and set aside. However, taking into the facts and circumstances of the case we find that penalty of Rs. 10,000/- will meet ends of justice. Consequentially, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed by imposing a penalty of Rs. 10,000/- on the respondents.
-
2004 (6) TMI 574 - CESTAT, CHENNAI
... ...
... ... ..... ibid along with their appeal or subsequent thereto. However, as is apparent from the records, the Commissioner (Appeals), before dismissing the assessee rsquo s appeal, did not give them any opportunity to show cause why the appeal should not be rejected for want of compliance with Section 35F. Had such opportunity been given, the party could have either expunged the Modvat credit and deposited the penalty amount or applied for waiver of pre-deposit in respect of the amounts of credit and penalty. Negation of natural justice to the party is thus evident from the records. Both the orders, therefore, are unsustainable. 6. emsp The impugned orders are set aside and these appeals are allowed by way of remand. The Commissioner (Appeals) shall give effective opportunity to the party under Section 35F before proceeding to dispose of their appeals on merits. Needless to say, the appellants shall be given reasonable opportunity of being heard both on stay applications and on appeals.
-
2004 (6) TMI 573 - CESTAT, KOLKATA
Demand - Limitation - Clandestine removal ... ... ... ... ..... assed by the Commissioner (Appeals) and found that the Commissioner (Appeals) has dealt with the submissions of the appellant company. He has not accepted the contentions of the appellant company that the remaining portion of the shortage was due to waste and scrap generated at the time of production. They have failed to produce any evidence documentary or otherwise, in support of their claim. They even did not mention the ratio of such waste and scrap generation. As regards invoking of the extended period, he has held that it has been rightly applied as the fact of shortage was suppressed by the appellant company from the Department. He has upheld the Order of Confirmation of the Demand amounting to Rs. 81,788.40 (Rupees eighty-one thousand seven hundred and eighty-eight and paise forty) which was admitted by the appellant company, as stated in Para 3 of the Order-in-Appeal. I find that the Order-in-Appeal is well-founded and as such, I uphold the same and reject the appeal.
-
2004 (6) TMI 572 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... directly made any declaration, ldquo he had sufficient involvement in the importation to render him a person concerned with committing or omitting acts which rendered the goods liable to confiscation. rdquo Penalty on the appellant could be only under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act. That sub-section relates to doing or omitting to do any act which renders goods liable for confiscation or abetting the act or omission. In fact, the order does not record any clear finding as to what is Mr. Raichura rsquo s guilt, whether it is commission of an act, or omission or abetting. There is only a general finding that he has participated in the commissioning of mis-declaration and he has ldquo shown sufficient involvement rdquo in the importation. These findings are too vague. Penalty is not sustainable on such a vague finding. Accordingly, the appeal of Shri Raichura is required to be allowed. We do so, with consequential relief, if any. 8. emsp Both the appeals are ordered as above.
-
2004 (6) TMI 571 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... e of the items. In fact according to the appellant the Auction Lists were received by them from M/s. Gulf Star Traders. So the appellant and his seller were in the best position to explain as to how the goods purportedly auctioned off to M/s. Dhanak Jewellers were acquired by them and at what prices. They have chosen not to disclose any detail. So adverse inference has to be drawn against them. In these facts and circumstances, we are of the firm opinion that the findings of the Commissioner remain unaffected by the defects pointed out by the appellant and those findings are required to be confirmed. No interference with the fines and penalties are also called for since those amounts are reasonable when viewed in the context of the premeditated nature of the offence and the amount of duty evasion involved. In fact, the quantum of punishments are quite moderate. 8. emsp In view of what is stated above, the appeals fail and are rejected. The original order is confirmed in full.
-
2004 (6) TMI 570 - CESTAT, KOLKATA
Not entitled to benefit of Notifications No. 191/87-C.E. and No. 7/94-C.E. ... ... ... ... ..... emsp On the other hand, Shri J.R. Madhiam, learned J.D.R. has relied upon a Tribunal rsquo s decision in the case of I.D.L. Industries v. Commissioner of Central Excise, BBSR reported in 2001 (136) E.L.T. 425 (T) 2000 (40) RLT 956 (CEGAT). In that case, the Tribunal has held that the Larger Bench held that Explosives used in mines for extracting zinc ores not entitled to benefit of the Notification No. 191/87-C.E., dated 4-8-87 and No. 7/94-C.E., dated 1-3-94, as the same are not used in the manufacture of zinc concentrate, since the process of manufacture of zinc concentrate starts in the factory and not in the mines. 4. emsp After hearing both sides, we find that this issue has already been settled by the Larger Bench of the Tribunal and in view of that, we uphold the Order of the Commissioner (Appeals) and reject the Appeal No. E-340/96 filed by the appellants. Appeal Nos. E/R-370/2001 and E/R-371/2001 also contain the identical question of classification and are rejected.
-
2004 (6) TMI 569 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
By-product - Excisability of ... ... ... ... ..... Rule 4 of the Valuation Rules application then have to be adopted for this purpose. The matter is therefore required to be remitted back, keeping the valuation and the classification determination open. The respondent are free to make all submissions for consideration by the adjudicator. (f) Since the goods when in the premises of the applicants at Mahad are not found to be liable to duty, confiscation liability under Rule 173Q and penalty under Rule 173Q, is not upheld. Same is set aside. Duty demands on such goods is also set aside. (g) The question of penalty and duty on goods cleared to Roha unit will be dependent upon the quantum of duty liability to be worked out. The penalty and duty on such goods are set aside and the issue remanded back for re-determination by the original authority. (h) The respondent are free to raise the issue of time bar for the duty liability for clearances effected to the Roha unit. 4. emsp Appeal and Cross objection disposed off in above term.
-
2004 (6) TMI 568 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Mica - Articles of mica - Composite goods ... ... ... ... ..... ugned goods are composite goods or not and once the clearance/purchase documents are verified to ascertain whether the related consignments can be identified by specific part/drawing number, on that basis the Adjudicating Authority can determine whether the same can be classified as insulators under Heading 85.46 or as mica products under Heading No. 68.07. We do not rule out the possibility of some of the consignments being classified under one of the two disputed headings while some of the other consignments being classified under the other heading depending on the result of an objective examination of the clearance/purchase documents as well as other available evidence. 7. emsp For the reasons stated above, we set aside the impugned orders and remand the matter for fresh adjudication by the original Authority with the direction that the appellants shall be afforded a reasonable opportunity of hearing before passing a fresh order. 8. emsp Appeal is allowed by way of remand.
-
2004 (6) TMI 567 - CESTAT, CHENNAI
Demand - Clandestine removal - Demand and redemption fine - Unaccounted stock of 85 bags ... ... ... ... ..... onsidered, as technical in nature. Therefore, seizure of 85 bags (4,285 Kgs), in my opinion, was not warranted and so also appropriation of the amount of Rs. 20,000/-, more particularly when the appellants have explained the difference in weight and when the goods were not removed clandestinely, as held in the case of CCE v. Techno Chem Engineers reported in 1990 (48) E.L.T. 401 (Tribunal). In view of the above, demand of duty of Rs. 13,302/- on the quantity of 85 bags, is set aside. 8. emsp In the result, the appeal is disposed of as under (a) emsp The aspect with regard to demand of duty of Rs. 3,959/- on 1,275 Kgs of cotton yarn is remanded for verification as to whether the duty has already been paid on it, as contended by the appellants. (b) emsp Duty of Rs. 85,543/- demanded on past clearance is set aside. (c) emsp Duty of Rs. 13,302/- demanded on 85 bags is set aside. Redemption fine of Rs. 20,000/- imposed on 85 bags (4,284 Kgs) is also set aside. Ordered accordingly.
-
2004 (6) TMI 566 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Modvat credit was taken in the manufacture of household goods which were cleared under Notification 4/97
-
2004 (6) TMI 565 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Cenvat/Modvat - Capital goods ... ... ... ... ..... and put to use for manufacture of final product. The lower authorities confirmed the penalty under Rule 173Q of Central Excise Rules, 1944. The instant appeal challenges the said penalty. 2. emsp In the appeal the appellants have pleaded that the requirement of taking Modvat credit after installation is applicable only in respect of the capital goods and not to the parts of the capital goods. It is claimed that the goods in question are indeed the parts of capital goods. 3. emsp Heard both sides. 4. emsp On going through the text of rule, Rule 57Q(2)(ii), it is noted that prohibition against taking credit is not applicable in respect of components, spares and accessories. 5. emsp Since the capital goods in question are spares these do not come within the mischief of Rule 57Q(2)(ii). Accordingly the entire proceedings being based on wrong premises are unsustainable. Consequently, the appeal succeeds and the same is allowed with consequential relief in accordance with the law.
-
2004 (6) TMI 564 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Penalty - Misdeclaration and undervaluation - Redemption fine - Quantum of ... ... ... ... ..... ts should be adequate to meet the ends of justice. Hence the fine is reduced from Rs. 2,40,000/- to Rs. 30,000/-. On the same reasonings penalty imposed on M/s. R.K. Apparels is set aside and the redemption fine is reduced from Rs. 1,65,000/- to Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand only). 7. emsp Accordingly appeals are partly allowed by setting aside the penalties and reducing redemption fine to Rs. 30,000/- and Rs. 15,000/- respectively as discussed above. 8. emsp It has also been pleaded by the ld. Advocate that Shri Gurbax Singh has not filed any appeal and therefore the findings in his case has become final and the departmental authorities are pressurising the appellants to make the payment of penalty levied on Shri Gurbax Singh. The authorities below are directed not to adopt any coercive measures to force the appellants to make payment of penalty imposed on Shri Gurbax Singh while implementing this order and permitting the release of the imported machines in question.
........
|
