-
2011 (6) TMI 1039
... ... ... ... ..... the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dharmendra Textile Processors (supra) in which it has been held that conscious concealment is not required to be proved by the revenue and that penalty is only a civil liability. The decision of the Tribunal in case of Smt. Shanta Kumar (supra), is also distinguishable. In that case the Assessing Officer had added part of the loan but in appeal the ld. AAC added the entire amount. It was held that penalty in respect of the entire loan was not justified. The facts are obviously d....... + More
-
2011 (6) TMI 1038
... ... ... ... ..... he ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the A.O. in the order passed u/s 154 has already accepted the claim of the assessee. Therefore, the additional ground No. 1 has become infructuous. So far as additional ground No. 2, is concerned, we find this ground is identical to ground taken by the assessee for A.Y. 2005-06. We have already decided the additional ground raised by the assessee and the matter has been restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for adjudication. Following the same ratio, the additional ground No........ + More
-
2011 (6) TMI 1037
... ... ... ... ..... htly observed in M.Mohar Ali v. Md. MamudAli reported in 1998 (3) CCC 328 (Gau) the suit itself is barred by limitation and this has also not been considered by the trial Court. Further the second Defendant was never ready and willing to perform his part of the contract. On the date of assignation of suit sale agreement i.e., under Ex.A2 on 21.03.2000, the second Defendant was not having any right or interest over the suit property so as to enable him to assign the suit sale agreement in favour of the Plaintiff. 64. Having....... + More
-
2011 (6) TMI 1036
... ... ... ... ..... nnot be concluded that the cheque was drawn by accused. The trial court rightly acquitted accused, in the absence of proof of drawing of the cheque, which is the most essential ingredient of the offence under Section 138 of the Act. 22. Learned Magistrate rightly held that execution is different from issuance of cheque. Issue means, to give something to somebody . Issuance of cheque does not mean drawing of cheque. I fully agree with the learned Magistrate that issuance and execution are different acts. Proof of issuance o....... + More
-
2011 (6) TMI 1035
... ... ... ... ..... ing Officer did not accept the contention of the assessee. He recorded a finding that these amounts cannot be said to be accrued and crystallized during the accounting year, hence he made the addition. On appeal, Learned CIT(Appeals) deleted the addition by following the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Sourasthra Cement Chemical Ind. Vs. CIT, reported in 123 ITR 669. 19. With the assistance of learned representatives, we have gone through the record carefully. The actual liability to pay to reconc....... + More
-
2011 (6) TMI 1034
... ... ... ... ..... rt in the case of CIT v. R. Chidambaranatha Mudaliar, supra, relied on by the learned DR would have no applicability insofar as the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court has decided the issue wherein the assessee therein had attempted to start a new business and the capital was lost. In the present case the assessee has not started any business. The assessee has only given an advance in the course of its business to M/s. Shriram Coffee Tea Plantation Pvt. Ltd. In the circumstances, we are of the view that the finding of th....... + More
-
2011 (6) TMI 1033
... ... ... ... ..... failure to comply with the provisions of law. The ex-partners have introduced their capital in the assessee firm and on retirement they were given their amount back through bearer cheques and, therefore, the assessee is able to prove that it had reasonable cause for failure to comply with the provisions of law. The finding of fact given by the learned CIT(A) show that the assessee made payments bona fide and the default was highly technical in nature, therefore, the learned CIT(A) was justified in canceling the penalty. Co....... + More
-
2011 (6) TMI 1032
... ... ... ... ..... d on enhanced compensation in all the three writ petitions - Sr. No. CWP No. Amount deducted 1. 10333 of 2011 Rs.44,118/- 2. 10417 of 2011 Rs.11,69,007/- 3. 10481 of 2011 Rs.35,96,498/- 8. Learned counsel for the petitioners was unable to dispute that in view of receipt of interest element on enhanced compensation, the same being taxable in the year of receipt, the petitioners were required to file return as tax was payable on the said amount. In such a situation, the petitioners have an alternative remedy by way of filing....... + More
-
2011 (6) TMI 1031
... ... ... ... ..... consequence will follow and there is no need to pass order on merits of additions in reassessment. The analogy in the present cases being same, we respectfully follow the decision of Calcutta High Court (supra) as no contra decision was brought to our attention, we hereby quash the impugned assessments in view of the finding of factual aspect i.e., absence of warrant of search in the name of the assessee, no proceeding u/s.153A can be initiated against the assessee and also there is no need to adjudicate the merits of the ....... + More
-
2011 (6) TMI 1030
... ... ... ... ..... money in the case of the assessee; therefore, burden was upon the A O to prove that assessee made payment of on money from undisclosed sources, which has not been discharged in this case. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the A O has not brought sufficient material against the assessee to make the above addition. The A O made addition merely on suspicion and assumption of facts, which cannot take place of legal proof. It is thus a case of no evidence for making the addition. We ar....... + More
-
2011 (6) TMI 1029
... ... ... ... ..... o before the date fixed for submission of the return of income cannot defeat the claim of the assessee. The decision taken by the assessee-Board was nothing but mere acknowledgement of the fact that the impugned sum was irrecoverable and therefore needed to be written off in the books of the assessee for the year under appeal pursuant to which the amount was actually written off by the assessee in its books for the year under appeal. 11. The assessee-Board has been returning substantial losses almost right from its incepti....... + More
-
2011 (6) TMI 1028
... ... ... ... ..... the present case. As regards learned DR s submission that arguments now raised in present appeal were not taken by the assessee before the learned CIT(A) and the same are also not covered in any of the grounds raised by the assessee, we are of the view that when the proceedings under 147 of the Act are challenged all the aspects pertaining to same gets covered and more particularly the aspect of existence of reason to believe , which is a precondition for initiation of any proceeding under section 147 of the Act. According....... + More
-
2011 (6) TMI 1027
... ... ... ... ..... ubmitted that the order does not deal with the submissions of the assessee in a speaking manner and, therefore, the same has been passed ignoring the principles of natural justice. Accordingly, it is prayed that the order may be restored to the file of the DRP for considering the submissions and passing a speaking order. 1.2 The learned DR had no objection to restore the matter to the file of the learned DRP. 2. We have considered the facts of the case and submissions made before us. We are of the view that the learned DRP....... + More
-
2011 (6) TMI 1026
... ... ... ... ..... so imposed penalty under section 271(1)(c), which was cancelled by the Tribunal. On a reference, the Hon'ble Bombay High Court upheld the decision of the Tribunal holding that there was nothing on record to show that the amount of cash credits added to the total income of the assessee was the concealed income of the assessee from undisclosed source. In our opinion, the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Bhimji Bhanjee Co (supra) as well as that of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the ca....... + More
-
2011 (6) TMI 1025
... ... ... ... ..... e as the amount for working out the disallowance without taking into consideration the investment in the said unit, some of which was made in the earlier year. 11. We have heard the rival contentions and perused record. In view of the finding of CIT(A) that the assessee had not borrowed any funds for creating the aforesaid assets and in the absence of the revenue bringing on record any evidence to the contrary, we are in conformity with the order of the CIT(A) in this regard and uphold the same. The assessee had shown inco....... + More
-
2011 (6) TMI 1024
... ... ... ... ..... ounting to Rs 9,72,538/- is admissible for deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(vi) of the Act. 3. We have heard both the parties. At the time of hearing, the learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that similar issue had been the subject-matter of consideration before a co-ordinate Bench in assessee s own case for the assessment year 2005-06 and the Tribunal vide order dated 29.05.2009 in ITA No 212/PN/09 has decided the issue in favour of the assessee. The learned Departmental Representative, appearing for the Revenue, t....... + More
-
2011 (6) TMI 1023
... ... ... ... ..... n u/s 11. I hold accordingly and modify the appellate order dated 16.2.2010. The decision relating to ground No.1 is accordingly modified and the AO is directed to allow exemption u/s 11 of the Act. 4. We have heard the parties. In our considered view there is no case for interference in the order of ld. CIT(A). The reasons are that ld. CIT(A) has passed the order following the order of the Tribunal wherein the claim of exemption was accepted. Since the facts of the case remained the same for this year also there is no rea....... + More
-
2011 (6) TMI 1022
... ... ... ... ..... k, whether M/s. Venus Lubricants exists or not, before coming to a conclusion that the party is not in existence. This conclusion is drawn merely on the fact that the notice issued to the above concerned has been returned un-served. No effort has been made by the Assessing Officer to contradict the evidence submitted by the assessee. In our opinion the assessee has discharged the burden of proof that lay on it and onus has now shifted to the revenue, to prove that the evidences filed by the assessee are wrong. Mere non-pro....... + More
-
2011 (6) TMI 1021
... ... ... ... ..... emand notice issued by the Director of Income-tax CIB has suggested that the appeal lies before the Tribunal. 4. In the circumstances, we find that it may be open for the assessee to file an appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), subject to the legal opinion that he may obtain. 5. But this appeal which is filed directly before the Tribunal is liable to be dismissed. 6. In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. 4. Further the said order has been followed in another case, which has been ....... + More
-
2011 (6) TMI 1020
... ... ... ... ..... the question of quantification of amount disallowable, because neither the assessee nor the revenue had challenged the estimation of amount disallowable, as made by the A.O. in the assessment order. In these circumstances, the Tribunal cannot go into the question of reasonableness of the estimate of the amount disallowable made by the A.O. because neither the assessee nor the revenue had challenged the findings of the A.O. making the disallowance u/s. 14A of the Act at Rs.42,130/-. Considering the totality of the facts and....... + More