|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 1 to 20 of 924 Records
-
2011 (8) TMI 1376
... ... ... ... ..... d. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has accepted that usage for personal purpose cannot be ruled out. It was contended that this usage is very less and the disallowance on this account is excessive. Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has upheld the action of the Assessing Officer on this account by observing that element of personal use has been accepted by the assessee itself. 10. Against the above order the assessee is in appeal before us. 11. We have heard both the counsel and perused the records. We find that....... + More
-
2011 (8) TMI 1375
... ... ... ... ..... racy. 41. Reliance was also placed by the learned Counsel for the Appellant on the decision of this Court in the case of Mohd. Khalid v. State of West Bengal (2002) 7 SCC 334. In that case, this Court held that offence of conspiracy can be proved by either direct or circumstantial evidence. In paragraph 24 at page 354 of the report the following observations have been made Conspiracies are not hatched in the open, by their nature, they are secretly planned, they can be proved even by circumstantial evidence, the lack of di....... + More
-
2011 (8) TMI 1374
... ... ... ... ..... e countenanced for the simple reason that in the Division Bench decision relied on by the learned Counsel for the petitioner, the application had already been filed before the Collector seeking permission under section 157-AA as required under sub-section (4) thereof. In the case decided by the learned Single Judge, the application had been moved before the Court concerned as it was a Court sale and, therefore, in both the transactions involved in the said 2 decisions, the applications had already been moved prior to the t....... + More
-
2011 (8) TMI 1373
... ... ... ... ..... t giving any undue adjournment to any of the parties. 13. In the facts and circumstances of this case, Justice U.P. Singh, a former Judge of this Court and a former Chief Judge of Kerala High Court, presently residing at 37, Patliputra Colony, Patna- 800013 is appointed as the sole Arbitrator to decide the arbitral proceeding. The erstwhile arbitral tribunal appointed by the respondents is hereby directed to send all the records of the arbitral proceeding to the said Arbitrator within fifteen days from today. 14. Both the ....... + More
-
2011 (8) TMI 1372
... ... ... ... ..... ng equivalent obligation in the form of continuing to provide use of the capital structure for efficient discharge of effluent emitted by memberindustries. Even accounting standard -9 provides such deferring of revenue for taxation. Accounting Standard 9 has been referred above and para 6 thereof is relevant. 13. Following the above decision of Special Bench in the case of ACIT vs. Mahindra Holidays Resorts (India) Ltd. (supra) we hold that the assessee was justified in deferring the revenue for taxation for four years. Ac....... + More
-
2011 (8) TMI 1371
... ... ... ... ..... d/- Justice N.K. Sodhi Presiding Officer Sd/- P.K. Malhotra Member Sd/- S.S.N. Moorthy Member 26. After we pronounced the orders in Court, the learned Counsel for the Appellants made an oral prayer that we should stay the operation of our orders to enable the Appellants to continue operating in the market till such time they approach the Supreme Court. This prayer is opposed by the learned Counsel appearing for the Board. The prayer made on behalf of the Appellants, in our view, is wholly misconceived. By orders dated June....... + More
-
2011 (8) TMI 1370
... ... ... ... ..... oks of accounts from DGIT Exemption and verify the facts of the case whether income was applied by the assessee trust for the objects of the trust. We, therefore, set aside both the appeals to the file of the assessing officer with the directions that he will obtain the books of accounts from the DGIT Exemption and verify whether the expenses incurred by the assessee were utilized for the purpose of the trust and all other conditions relating to allowability of deduction under section 11 were satisfied or not. The ld. AR o....... + More
-
2011 (8) TMI 1369
... ... ... ... ..... an Kumar, Adv., Mr. Manish Pushkarna, Adv., Mr. B. Krishna Prasad,Adv. ORDER Delay condoned. The Special Leave Petition is dismissed.
-
2011 (8) TMI 1368
... ... ... ... ..... rchased by the assessee was not a commercial vehicle and, therefore, 50% depreciation could not be allowed to the assessee. 8. As per note 3A, forming part of Appendix I, the expression commercial vehicle in the aforesaid rule means and includes the light motor vehicle. The expression light motor vehicle is further defined to mean a motor car, the unladen weight of which, does not exceed 7,500 kilograms. In the present case, it is not in dispute that the assessee fulfills all the conditions laid down in rule III(2)(iid) of....... + More
-
2011 (8) TMI 1367
... ... ... ... ..... ication as income under the head of business and profession but would fall for classification as income from other sources. Undoubtedly as counsel appearing on behalf of the assessee submits, in determining under which head income would fall, the court must be guided by the principle laid down by the Supreme Court in Nalinikant Ambalal Mody vs. S.A.L. Narayan Row, CIT 1966 61 ITR 428. The Supreme Court held that whether an income falls under one head or another has to be decided according to the common notions of practical....... + More
-
2011 (8) TMI 1366
... ... ... ... ..... s, apparently the owner of the goods (gold) from whose possession the gold was seized, and option to pay fine, which shall not exceed the market price of the goods confiscated, in lieu of confiscation. Such market price has to relate to the date, when the goods (gold) was confiscated. 24. In the facts and circumstances, we find that the custom authorities did not decide the case on the settled principles of law, relating to the burden of proof, and the reliance upon the statements under Section 108 of the Act. They also di....... + More
-
2011 (8) TMI 1365
... ... ... ... ..... re, the order of the CIT (A) has to be reversed on this issue. It is clear that the initial assessment year for the above purposes was the first year in which the assessee claimed the deduction u/s 80IA(1) after exercising his option as per the provisions of s.80IA(2) of the Act. Consequently, the assessee is entitled to claim the deduction of Rs.25,44,326 u/s 80IA in respect of the profits from the windmill activity. Accordingly, the clarificatory ground raised is allowed. In the result, adjudication of the grounds 3 and ....... + More
-
2011 (8) TMI 1364
... ... ... ... ..... d by these Rules. By not granting the credit of TDS to the assessee, rr. 37BA(1), (3)(i) and (4) were flouted. The learned CIT(A) correctly rectified this position also. 39. The Department has not been able to show as to why, in this scenario the assessee was required to file any revised return of income. There was no excess TDS to be claimed. It was due to sheer unintended inadvertence that the total TDS of Rs. 31,47,636 did not get shown in the return, though as per the TDS certificates filed along with the return, the t....... + More
-
2011 (8) TMI 1363
... ... ... ... ..... nts was maintainable but in view of Order III Rules 1 and 4, Chapter relating to the role of Pleaders, and in view of the conduct of the appellants in not raising any objection as to the act of their counsel except filing review petition, we are not inclined to accept the claim of the appellants. 20) Finally, Mr. Garg vehemently contended that by the concession of their counsel, appellants lost their property and they suffered huge loss in terms of money. On perusal of the modified decree as available in the order of the H....... + More
-
2011 (8) TMI 1362
... ... ... ... ..... ties finding the grounds of appeal of the Assessee devoid of merits. 11. Now coming to the other issue of disallowance of ₹ 11,19,048 being expenses under the head Garden, Park, Lake and Vegetable, undisputedly the Assessee has incurred this amount for maintaining the garden, park, lake and garden expenses and growing vegetables directly. The facts made out by the Departmental Authorities are that the sale proceeds of vegetable grown was not brought to account by the Assessee. Therefore, the Departmental Authorities ....... + More
-
2011 (8) TMI 1361
... ... ... ... ..... ssue as in the present appeals and that the said case was dismissed by this Court by judgment and order passed on 16-8-2007. Since in the connected matter mentioned above, the appeal was dismissed, therefore, being similar in nature and as similar issues arise in the present appeals, these appeals are also dismissed.
-
2011 (8) TMI 1360
... ... ... ... ..... with commercial prudence and nothing is on record indicating that the loss was claimed to be bogus. Even otherwise, the businessman is the best judge in his interest under the peculiar facts and circumstances, therefore, there is nothing on record except probabilities, surmises and conjectures, that too, without any cogent material on record especially when the accounts are audited, transactions are properly recorded, sales are verified, purchases are not doubted, therefore, in view of the decision in ITO vs. Madanlal Sing....... + More
-
2011 (8) TMI 1359
... ... ... ... ..... lls P. Ltd, 293 ITR 201, inter alia. This fact was not or could not be denied by the ld.DR as we are also aware of this line of action being taken by the Benches in Chennai. Consequently, we restore this appeal of the Revenue to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction that he shall decide the impugned issue in the light of plethora of judicial pronouncements on this issue. Needless to mention that the Assessing Officer shall give opportunity of hearing to the assessee as required by law. 4. The cross objection b....... + More
-
2011 (8) TMI 1358
... ... ... ... ..... Since, in this case, neither the appellant nor the amalgamating companies are carrying on any manufacturing activity, the set off of losses of the amalgamating companies cannot be allowed. The Assessing Officer s decision is upheld and the appellant gets no relief on this ground also. 29. Now the assessee has preferred an appeal before us but during the course of hearing nothing has been placed before us to substantiate that the amalgamating companies are industrial undertakings. We however, carefully examined the order of....... + More
-
2011 (8) TMI 1357
... ... ... ... ..... ants who purchased shares while in possession of the unpublished price sensitive information are still continuing to enjoy the fruits of the ill-gotten gains that they made. It is a different matter that the price of the scrip may have fallen today. The authorised representatives of the appellants inform us that immediately after the issue of bonus shares the price of the scrip did go up from ₹ 18 to ₹ 63 per share. This was a fit case where the Board also should have initiated proceedings under sections 11 and....... + More
........
|
