|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 61 to 80 of 917 Records
-
2011 (9) TMI 1195 - ITAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... entral cooperative bank (supra) has held that the investments made by the cooperative banks with a view to earn interest constitute banking business. As the income arising from investments are attributable to the business of banking assessable under the head “profits and gains of business”, deductible u/s.80P(2)(a)(i) of Income tax Act, 1961 would be allowable to the assessee. Thus, the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Togar’s cooperative sale society Ltd (supra) would not be applicable to the facts of the present case.” 5. In this view of the matter and respectfully following the esteemed views of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of The Mahanaghar Cooperative Bank ltd (supra) and also the decision of the coordinate Bench in assessee’s own case (supra), we uphold the conclusions arrived at by the CIT(A) and decline to interfere. 6. In the result, appeal is dismissed. Pronounced in the open court on 30th September, 2011
-
2011 (9) TMI 1194 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM
... ...
... ... ..... the date of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessees. We therefore had no other option except to hear the appeal ex-parte and accordingly the revenue was heard. We have carefully examined the order of the CIT(A) on the impugned issues and we find that CIT(A) has adjudicated all the issues in detail in its order. Since no infirmity is noticed in the order of the CIT(A), we confirm the same. 3. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Pronounced in the open Court on 06.09.2011
-
2011 (9) TMI 1193 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Ludhiana have not been confronted to the assessee. It is a violation of principle of natural justice. As regards the question of condoning delay in filing the application u/s 12A, the CIT has not given a cogent reason. Considering the facts and circumstances of the present case, we are of the view that the order passed by Commissioner of Income Tax, Ludhiana-I u/s 12AA(1)(b)(ii) of the Act, deserves to be set aside in toto. We order accordingly and direct the CIT, Ludhiana-I to decide the matter afresh in accordance with law after affording due and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We also direct the CIT to decide the matter preferably within two months from the date of receipt of order. At the same time, we think it proper to direct the assessee to cooperate and attend the hearing before the CIT, Ludhiana-I. 5. For statistical purposes, the appeal is allowed. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 20th September,2011.
-
2011 (9) TMI 1192 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... reinabove the issue of levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) is also restored back to the CIT(A).” 8. We find that the issue raised in the present appeal is identical to the issue raised before the Tribunal in assessee’s own case relating to assessment year 2000-01, order dated 29.9.2010 and following the above said ratio we remit the issue back to the file of the CIT (Appeals) to decide the issue in line with our directions in the above said appeal. 9. The Revenue is in appeal against the partial relief allowed by the assessee. Since the matter is being set aside to the file of the assessee to decide the preliminary issue/service of notice u/s 148, 143(2), and or the order passed u/s 144 of the Act and we are not pressing the issue on merits. Ground Nos. 5 to 8 raised by the assessee are thus allowed for statistical purposes. 10. In the result, the appeals of both the assessee and the Revenue are allowed. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 27th day of September, 2011.
-
2011 (9) TMI 1191 - SUPREME COURT
Public servant taking gratification - offence punishable u/s 7, 13(1)(d)(ii) r/w Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (Act) - Article 142 and its applicability - Quantum of sentence - the appellant working as a Head Clerk in the Traffic Cadre Section, he was caught red handed along with the money which was recovered from the right hand side pocket of his pant and was convicted u/s 7 of the Act for which he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of ₹ 500/-, in default, simple imprisonment for one month. He was also convicted for the offence u/s 13(1)(d)(ii) r/w Section 13(2) of the Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and fine of ₹ 500/-, in default, simple imprisonment for one month. The trial Court ordered that both the sentences of imprisonment shall run concurrently. the appellant submitted that inasmuch as the alleged incident took place on 14.11.1997 and 14 years have elapsed since then, the amount of ₹ 200/- said to have been received by the appellant is trivial in nature and also of the fact that due to the said conviction and sentence he lost his job, leniency may be shown and sentence be reduced to the period already undergone. He fairly admitted that out of the maximum period of one year, the appellant had served only 52 days in prison.
HELD THAT:- In the case on hand, it is to be noted that on appreciation of oral and documentary evidence led in by the prosecution and the defence and on appreciation of entire materials, the court of first instance i.e. the trial Court convicted the appellant and sentenced him. The High Court, as an appellate Court, once again analysed all the material, and the prosecution had proved the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt concurred with the conclusion arrived at by the trial Court and dismissed the appeal of the appellant. Inasmuch as both the courts have thoroughly discussed the matter with reference to the charges leveled against the appellant and in view of the limited order dated 28.01.2008 by this Court issuing notice confining to quantum of sentence only. we feel that it is not a case of such nature that the appellant should be heard on all points, consequently, we reject the request of the learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant. Consequently, the appeal fails and the same is dismissed. Since the appellant is on bail, the bail bonds executed by him stand cancelled.
applicability of Article 142 of the Constitution of India is not in dispute, we make it clear that exercise of such power would, however, depend on the facts and circumstances of each case. The High Court, in exercise of its jurisdiction, u/s 482 of the Crpc and this Court, under Article 142 of the Constitution, would not ordinarily direct quashing of a case involving crime against the society particularly, when both the trial Court as also the High Court have found that the charge leveled against the appellant under the Act has been made out and proved by the prosecution by placing acceptable evidence.
-
2011 (9) TMI 1190 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... cumstances of the case, request for extension of time for a period of three months from today is granted. It is provided that the petitioners shall have time up to 08.12.2011 to comply with the requirement of pre-deposit. They shall however, be on the condition that if during the above period the petitioners sale any of its immovable properties, proceeds thereof shall be first utilized for the purpose of pre-deposit as required by the Tribunal. An undertaking to this effect shall be filed within a period of one week from today by Director of the Company. Application stands disposed of.
-
2011 (9) TMI 1189 - ITAT INDORE
... ...
... ... ..... ) while deleting the disallowance of interest expenditure. We, therefore, set-aside the order of the CIT(A) on this issue and matter is restored back to the file of the AO for deciding afresh in the light of proposition of law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of S. A. Builders (supra). We direct accordingly. 28. Ground taken by the Revenue in the assessment year 2005-06 with regard to deleting the addition/disallowance of interest of ₹ 4.62 crores is exactly same as taken by the Revenue in assessment year 2004-05. As the facts and circumstances are the same, following the same reasoning as given in the assessment year 2004-05, we restore the matter back to AO with similar directions. 29. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in assessment year 2002-03 is dismissed, whereas appeals for assessment years 2001-02, 2004-05 & 2005-06 are allowed in part for statistical purposes. This order has been pronounced in the open court on 16th September, 2011.
-
2011 (9) TMI 1188 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... assessee is that when in the previous years, the Revenue had accepted the claim of the assessee, in the subsequent years, the same could not have been declined. In this regard, the Tribunal relied on a decision of this Court in the case Saurashtra Cement and Chemicals Industries v. CIT, 123 ITR 669(Guj). Having perused the order on record with the assistance of the learned counsel for the Revenue, we are of the opinion that no substantial question of law arises in this appeal. The Tribunal has noted the process undertaken by the assessee to produce the NPA mix and held that the same amounts to manufacturing activity. Additionally, in the earlier years, such benefits under section 80IB were granted by the Revenue to this very assessee, but for the subsequent years, without reopening the issue of the earlier years, as held by this Court, in the case of Saurashtra Cement and Chemicals Industries (supra), the same could not have been done. In the result, tax appeal is dismissed.
-
2011 (9) TMI 1187 - ITAT JAIPUR
... ...
... ... ..... .00 lacs on the basis of the valuation reports, thus this ground of appeal is partly allowed and the appellant will get the necessary relief.’ 3.5 We have heard both the parties. As per valuation report dated 19th Sept. 1993, the area of plot is around 506 Sq. Yds. In the paper book filed by the ld. AR, the valuation of property as per bank sanction letter is not available. In the written submissions, ld. AR of the assessee has given the area of plot at 584 Sq. Yds. Before the ld. CIT(A), it was submitted that area of plot is less than 500 Sq. Mtr. Hence, the issue of ascertaining the area of the plot is restored back on the file of the AO. After ascertaining the area of the plot, the AO will ascertain the market value for different assessment years. Hence, the valuation of this property is restored back on the file of the AO. 4. In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes. The order is pronounced in the open Court on 23-09-2011
-
2011 (9) TMI 1186 - ITAT RAJKOT
... ...
... ... ..... ions are as under - Particulars Vrundavan Gokul Suppressed sale 21,52,03,905 8,00.77,050 9% net profit rate for estimation 1,93,68,351 72,06,934 Addition sustained by CIT(A) 2,84,06,905 85,52,229 9% profit addition sustainable 1,93,68,351 72,06,934 Balance excess 90,38,554 13,45,295 20. In accordance with above calculation, we confirm the addition to the extent of ₹ 1,93,68,351/- in the hands of Vrundavan and ₹ 72,06,934/- in the hands of the Gokul and balance addition ₹ 90,38,554/- in case of Vrundavan and ₹ 13,45,295/- in the case of Gokul out of the total addition sustained by CIT(A) are deleted. 21. The learned representatives of the parties submitted that facts of the case in Gokul Ceramics Pvt. Ltd. are similar. Therefore, the cross appeal of that case is also decided in accordance with above discussion. 22. In the result, appeals of assessee are partly allowed and appeals by revenue are dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 9-09-2011.
-
2011 (9) TMI 1185 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... or The Respondent (s) Mr. R. P. Bhat,Sr. adv. , Mr. H. R. Rao, Adv. , Ms. Neera Gupta, Adv. And Mr. B. V. Balaram Das,Adv. ORDER Leave granted. No stay.
-
2011 (9) TMI 1184 - ITAT AHMEDABAD
... ...
... ... ..... hat the penalty shall not be imposed in respect of a default relating to the provisions mentioned therein if the person or the assessee concerned can show that there was a reasonable cause for default in question. Section 272A(2)(k) falls within the ambit of sec.273B of the Act. It is observed that the AO has levied the penalty in a routine manner without bringing the facts on record to establish that the appellant committed the default without a reasonable cause. The ld. CIT(A) has relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Hindustan Steel Ltd. vs. State of Orissa (supra) and Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Harsiddh Construction (P) Ltd. vs. CIT which are squarely applicable to the facts of assessee’s case. We find no infirmity in the order of ld. CIT(A) and uphold the same. The ground raised by the Revenue is dismissed. 6.In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in Open Court on 14/09/2011.
-
2011 (9) TMI 1183 - ITAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... The admitted fact in this case is that income in question on which TDS is made, is not assessable during the assessment year 2003-04. Hence, in our 5opinion, the first appellate authority was right in rejecting the contention of the assessee. Consequently, this ground is dismissed. 25. Coming to levy of penalty under section 234D, the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in Bajaj Hindustan Ltd. (supra) held that interest under section 234D cannot be charged in respect of refund granted prior to 1st June 2003. In the case on hand, the return of income was processed under section 143(3) on 19th February 2004, which is after 1st June 2003. The return of income itself was filed after 1st June 2003. Under these circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that interest under section 234D has been rightly charged in this case. This ground is, thus, dismissed. 26. In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 30th September 2011
-
2011 (9) TMI 1182 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... he alternate to make suitable amendments in the law of adverse possession. A copy of this judgment be sent to the Secretary, Ministry of Law and Justice, Department of Legal Affairs, Government of India for taking appropriate steps in accordance with law. 52. This Special Leave Petition is dismissed with costs of ₹ 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) to be paid by the State of Haryana for filing a totally frivolous petition and unnecessarily wasting the time of the Court and demonstrating its evil design of grabbing the properties of lawful owners in a clandestine manner. The costs be deposited within four weeks from the date of pronouncement of this judgment. In this petition, we did not issue notice to the Defendants, therefore, we direct that the costs be deposited with the National Legal Services Authority for utilizing the same to enable the poor litigants to contest their cases. 53. This Special Leave Petition being devoid of any merit is accordingly dismissed.
-
2011 (9) TMI 1181 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... the property shall be fixed. We record the statement made on behalf of the Central Bank and the Standard Chartered Bank by their Counsel that both the Banks shall cooperate with the Recovery Officer and shall meet all the expenses of the sale, including towards newspaper advertisements. On the request of the two banks, we further clarify that if the Banks are ready and willing to meet the expenses for the issuance of a publication in any additional newspapers, that shall also be permitted by the Recovery Officer at the expenses which have been agreed to be borne by the Banks. We direct the Recovery Officer to expedite the process of sale and to hold a meeting for fixing the terms and conditions within a period of three weeks from today. The sale process should be completed within a period of three months from the date on which an authenticated copy of this order is placed before the Recovery Officer. Rule is made absolute in these terms. There shall be no order as to costs.
-
2011 (9) TMI 1180 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... visions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provisions in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party. (7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge.” 9. Keeping in mind the principle laid down by the Apex Court in the aforesaid decision, I am of the opinion that the impugned complaint cannot be sustained in the eyes of law and deserves to be quashed and set aside. 10. Consequently, the applications are allowed. The criminal complaint being numbered as Criminal Case No.6076/2006 and the proceedings initiated in consequence thereof, are quashed and set aside. Rule is made absolute.
-
2011 (9) TMI 1179 - ITAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... otional basis, the same in our opinion, cannot perpetuate the claim in the future years for deduction on account of loss due to difference in exchange. We also do not find any merit in the arguments advanced by the ld. counsel for the assessee that the extra income shown in the preceding years should be allowed to be reversed during the year and the assessee be allowed to claim the same as business loss or bad debts. Every assessment year is separate and distinct and the income or loss of one year cannot intermingle with the income or loss of another year. Further the loss due to difference in foreign exchange, in our opinion, cannot be equated with trading loss. The loss on such notional basis cannot be allowed. In this view of the matter, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT(A) and uphold the same. The ground raised by the assessee is accordingly dismissed. 12. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed. Order pronounced on 21.9.2011.
-
2011 (9) TMI 1178 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... . Balaram Das,Adv. For the Respondent Mr. Sameer Parekh,Adv. Mr. Kunal Vajani,Adv. Mr. Ankit Virmani,Adv.Mr. Rajat Nair,Adv. Ms. Suman Yadav,Adv. for M/s. Parekh & Co.,Advs. ORDER Delay condoned. The special leave petition is dismissed.
-
2011 (9) TMI 1177 - ITAT HYDERABAD
... ...
... ... ..... 377; 312.97 lakhs has to be considered for computing the book profit and accordingly the Assessing Officer is directed to consider the same and also to consider the amount which is the final balance in the Profit and Loss A/c. carried to balance sheet as the starting point for computing book profit u/s. 115JB in this case." Aggrieved the Department is in appeal before us. 5. The learned DR relied on the decision of the Madras ITAT 'B' Bench decision in the case of Shri Rajendra Mills Ltd. vs. DCIT, 63 TTJ (Mad) 697. 6. We have heard both the parties. We find that the CIT(A) has followed the decision of Hyderabad Bench in the case of Gulf Oil Corporation vs. ACIT reported in 112 TTJ 135 while deciding the issue. Therefore, we find no infirmity in the order of the CIT(A) and the same is upheld. The grounds raised by the Department are dismissed. 7. In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed. Order pronounced in the Open court on 28th September, 2011.
-
2011 (9) TMI 1176 - ITAT BANGALORE
... ...
... ... ..... on to the extent the assessee has claimed for employees who have been working for less than 300 days in the previous year in accordance with clause (ii)(c) of the Explanation to Sec.80JJAA, after providing due opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 2.2 Aggrieved by his directions, the revenue is in appeal before us. At the time of hearing, learned counsel for the assessee filed before us the copies of the orders the Tribunal in the assessee’s own case for the earlier assessment years. We find that the issue has been considered by the CIT(A), and accordingly has issued suitable direction to the AO. Merely because an appeal has been filed in the High Court the order of the Tribunal does not lose its precedential value. The CIT(A) has rightly followed the same. In view of the same, we do not find any reason to interfere with the orders of the CIT(A). 3. In the result, the revenue’s appeal is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on the 29th September, 2011.
........
|
