|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 121 to 140 of 769 Records
-
2012 (4) TMI 709 - ITAT KOLKATA
... ...
... ... ..... n individual, and the claim of the assessee is as per provisions of law. Once the assessee is not liable to deduct TDS under the provision of Section 194C(1), the provisions of Section 40a(ia) for making disallowance of expenditure for non-deduction of TDS will not apply. We further find that, it is not the case of the revenue that the expenses are bogus or unreasonable or excessive but the disallowance is made merely for non-deduction of TDS. Accordingly, we are of the considered view that CIT(A) has rightly deleted the disallowance and we confirm the same.” 4. As the issue raised by the revenue is exactly on similar facts in the present case, taking a consistent view, we are of the view that the amended provisions of section 194C(1) of the Act will not apply to the present assessment year on the assessee. Accordingly, this issue of the revenue’s appeal is dismissed. 5. In the result, revenue’s appeal is dismissed. 6. Order is pronounced in the open court.
-
2012 (4) TMI 708 - CESTAT NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... d is only one day with less than the minimum of 15 days prescribed in Rule 10 and abatement cannot be given on account of that day. Aggrieved by the decision of the adjudicating authority Respondents filed an appeal with Commissioner (Appeals) who held that the two periods constitute one single continuous period and allowed the appeal. Aggrieved by the order of Commissioner (Appeals) Revenue has filed this appeal before the Tribunal.”, shall be substituted. 4.5. In Para 6 of the order. For the word “Appellants” in the two places where it occurs the word “Respondents” shall be substituted. 4.6. In para 9 of the order. For the sentence,- “Thus the appeal succeeds and is ordered accordingly.” the following sentence,- “Thus the appeal is without merits and is rejected”, shall be substituted. 5. The Application for Rectification of Mistake is allowed accordingly. (Operative part pronounced in Court on 20-4-2012)
-
2012 (4) TMI 707 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... before us, it seems to us that to direct the petitioner to pay interest at the different rates in force during the material period would be inconsistent and may even be discriminatory. This aspect has not been considered and noticed in the impugned order. Rather than remanding this old matter, we have examined the issue. We are informed that interest 10 for the entire material period would amount to Rs. 19.56 crores as against Rs. 25.87 crores directed to be paid by the CCESC. The petitioner has already paid Rs. 13,00,00,000/-. He is directed to pay the balance of interest on the footing that interest payable would be at the rate of 10 for the entire relevant period. Immunity is allowed with regard to the balance of interest over and above the said percentage. 25. In the result the writ petition is partly allowed, the only relief being with reference to the rate of interest payable by the petitioner. All interim orders stand vacated. There shall be no order as to costs.
-
2012 (4) TMI 706 - SUPREME COURT
Permission to Petitioners' advocate allowed to be present during the interrogation of the petitioners - Held that:- The criminal miscellaneous petition, as well as the writ petition are allowed and it is directed that the petitioners' advocate should be allowed to be present during the interrogation of the petitioners. He/they should be made to sit at a distance beyond hearing range, but within visible distance and the lawyer must be prepared to be present whenever the petitioners are called upon to attend such interrogation.
-
2012 (4) TMI 705 - ITAT CHENNAI
... ...
... ... ..... actual amount of expenses incurred by the C&F Agent on behalf of the assessee. The ld.CIT(A) also found that all payments were made by the assessee by account payee cheques to the C&F Agent which fact has been admitted by the Assessing Officer in his remand report. Therefore, the ld.CIT(A) has rightly deleted the disallowance of ₹ 14,91,489/-. No specific error in the above finding of the ld.CIT(A) could be pointed out by the ld.DR. The ld. DR could not produce any material before us to show that the amount of ₹ 14,91,489/- did not represent actual reimbursement of expenses incurred by the C&F Agent on behalf of the assessee. In the above facts and circumstances of the case, we do not find any good and justifiable reason to interfere with the order of the ld.CIT(A) which is confirmed and the grounds of appeal of the Revenue are dismissed. 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 20-04-2012.
-
2012 (4) TMI 704 - ITAT AHMEDABAD
... ...
... ... ..... r each bank account and if there is withdrawal from a bank account, after the peak date of such particular bank account, then assessee has to establish that such withdrawal from that bank account had been deposited in some other bank account before the peak date of such other bank account. If the assessee cannot establish this aspect then, the A.O. is justified in adopting separate peak of each bank account. The A.O. should pass necessary order as per law as per above discussion after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. This ground is allowed for statistical purposes. 7. Ground No.7 was not pressed and accordingly rejected as not pressed. 8. Ground No.8 is regarding charging of interest u/s 158 BFA of the Income tax Act, 1961. This is consequential and hence, no separate adjudication is called for. 9. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above. 10. Order pronounced in the open court on the date mentioned hereinabove.
-
2012 (4) TMI 703 - CESTAT CHENNAI
... ...
... ... ..... ich requires the option to be given either for producing Pre-shipment Inspection Certificate or for subjecting the consignment to 100 physical examination in terms of Customs Circular No. 56/2004. Since in both these cases the second option has been exercised, I am of the view that the lower appellate authority has taken a correct decision that both the cases do not warrant any confiscation or penal action. Both appeals filed by the Revenue against her order are dismissed. Both cross objections filed by the Respondents also stand disposed of. (Dictated and pronounced in open court)
-
2012 (4) TMI 702 - CESTAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... ;As the issue is settled by the decision of the Madras High Court in the case of Beauty Dyers (supra) therefore, the appeal is being taken up for hearing after waiving pre-deposit. 6. As the demand is confirmed under Hot Air Stenter Independent Textile Processors Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1998 and the said Rule is declared to be ultra vires by the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Beauty Dyers (supra) therefore, the demand in the impugned order is set aside and the appellants are liable to pay excise duty under Sec. 3 of the Act or any other provisions contemplated for the same as held by the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the above mentioned case. The matter is remanded to the adjudicating authority to decide the case afresh in view of the Hon’ble Madras High Court’s decision in the case of Beauty Dyers (supra) after giving an opportunity of personal hearing to the appellants. 7. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms.
-
2012 (4) TMI 701 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... urselves to accept the submission. The findings of fact arrived at by the authorities below are based on proper appreciation of the facts and the material available on record and surrounding circumstances. The doubtful nature of the transaction and the manner in which the sums were found credited in the books of accounts maintained by the assessee have been duly taken into consideration by the authorities below. The transactions though apparent were held to be not real ones. May be the money came by way of bank cheques and was paid through the process of banking transaction but that itself is of no consequence." In view of the foregoing discussion, we are of the view that the judgment and order of the Income Tax Authorities as well as Tribunal are based on relevant materials and appellate tribunal was correct in dismissing the appeal. The appeal is concluded by findings of facts and no substantial question of law arises for consideration, both the appeals are dismissed.
-
2012 (4) TMI 700 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... re and source of the said ₹ 50 lakhs and therefore the appellant has failed to explain the cash credit of ₹ 50 lakhs and which was rightly charged to income tax as income of the assessee. The said investment of ₹ 50 lakhs is rightly added as income of the previous years. 11. In our opinion, the Tribunal rightly rejected the contention of the appellant with regard to the contentions that the Assessing Officer ought to have conducted a further probe by issuing a notice or summons in examining the creditor. When the existence of the creditor itself was not established by the appellant and when he has failed to discharge the primary burden, which lies on him, the question of conducting further enquiry or probe does not arise. Therefore, we do not see any substantial questions of law arising for consideration to admit the appeal. 12. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. As the appeal is dismissed, miscellaneous petitions shall stand closed.
-
2012 (4) TMI 699 - ITAT AHMEDABAD
... ...
... ... ..... post survey period, GP rate should be applied. Accordingly in this case also, we hold that for the pre survey period, book results should be accepted and for the post survey period, GP rate should be applied. For the post survey period in this case, the turnover is of ₹ 22,61,135/- and the GP rate in this case is applied by the A.O. of 13.62 . By applying this GP rate on this turnover, the GP of post survey period works out to ₹ 3,07,967/- as against this, the assessee has disclosed a gross profit of ₹ 3,65,595/- which is more than GP worked out for the post survey period by applying GP rate of 13.62 and hence, no separate addition is called for in respect of post survey period also in the present case. We direct the A.O. accordingly. 14. In the result, this appeal of the assessee is also partly allowed. 15. In the combined result, both the appeals of the assessees are partly allowed. 16. Order pronounced in the open court on the date mentioned hereinabove.
-
2012 (4) TMI 698 - ITAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... to the assessee. When so applied in this case, the net income would be a negative figure and the provisions of the Act would be more beneficial to the assessee. 5. The Tribunal thus allowed the claim of the Assessee in AY 01-02. The facts and circumstances under which the disallowance of interest was made in A.Y 2002-03 and the reasons for making the disallowance are identical. This appeal was taken up for hearing pursuant to the order of the Hon’ble High Court remanding the issue for fresh consideration by the Tribunal. In view of the similarity of facts and circumstances the decision rendered by the Tribunal for A.Y 2001-02 will be squarely applicable. Respectfully following the aforesaid decision we hold that the disallowance of interest sustained by the CIT(A) deserves to be deleted. Accordingly the ground of appeal is allowed. 6. In the result, the appeal in so far as ground No.1 concerned is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on the 4th day of April 2012
-
2012 (4) TMI 697 - ITAT AHMEDABAD
... ...
... ... ..... ee. Relevant paragraph No.8.1. is as under - “8.1. Not only the above order, there is one more order which has also been placed for our perusal passed by ITAT Ahmedabad Bench “C” , decided in the case of a sister-concern, namely, Jay Chemical Industries Ltd. vs. DCIT bearing ITA No.875/Ahd/2007(Assessee’s appeal ) and ITA No.1177/Ahd/2007 (Revenue’s appeal) for Assessment Year 2003-04 order dated 06/11/2009,( also authored by my esteemed colleague brother ) wherein vide paragraph Nos.17, 18 & 19 it was held as under -” 3.2. Since in the past on this issue, a consistent view has regularly been taken by the Tribunal, therefore, respectfully following the same for this year as well, we hereby reject this ground of the Revenue. 4. As far as the final result of the appeal is concerned, that shall not alter as pronounced earlier, quote “24. Thus, the appeal of the revenue is partly allowed, but for statistical purposes.” unquote.
-
2012 (4) TMI 696 - CESTAT NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... ring before the same officer in connection with other exports. In the circumstances, we do not appreciate the order passed without serving a show cause notice and without personal hearing. 5. Since the order is passed without complying with the principles of natural justice and without appreciating the fact that the DGFT are still considering the issue of EODC, we waive the dues arising from the impugned order for admission of appeal and we take up the appeal itself for hearing because no purpose will be served by keeping this appeal pending in the Tribunal. 6. We set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to the adjudicating authority for serving a show cause notice in respect of the 6 licenses to the appellant and thereafter giving them a personal hearing and complying with principles of natural justice and pass adjudication order afresh. 7. Stay petition and appeal are disposed of in the above terms. (Order dictated and pronounced in the open Court)
-
2012 (4) TMI 695 - ITAT KOLKATA
... ...
... ... ..... f ₹ 14,05,036/-. This ground is, accordingly, partly allowed." 4. The CIT(A) after taking the details of deposits and withdrawals restricted the peak addition at ₹ 1,95,597/-. Revenue before us could not adduce anything that the peak credit assessed by the CIT(A) is wrong. We find that the assessee has filed peak credit computation on the basis of transaction recorded in the bank account before CIT(A) but Revenue could not point out any defect in the same. In view of the above facts and circumstances, we are of the view that the CIT(A) has simply accepted the peak credit after AO's remand report. We find no infirmity in the order of CIT(A) in sustaining the part addition on the basis of the theory of 3 ITA No.1767/K/2011 Smt. Madhu Kedia, A.Y. 07-08 peak credit. Accordingly, we confirm the order of the CIT(A) and this issue of Revenue's appeal is dismissed. 5. In the result, revenue's appeal is dismissed. 6. Order is pronounced in the open court.
-
2012 (4) TMI 694 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... he foreign matters is permissible under the law, the petitioner is at liberty to remove the foreign matters within five days from the date of communication of this order. After the foreign matter is removed, the goods shall be tested by a laboratory recognized by the respondent no.3 and after testing, the Commissioner of Customs (Port) Kolkata, respondent no.4 shall clear the food items in accordance with the standards prescribed and in accordance with law within five days thereafter. This order is passed without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties and subject to further order that may be passed. Learned advocates for the parties are permitted to take down the gist of this order for the purpose of communication and the respondents including the respondent nos.3,4 and 5 shall act on the basis of such communication. Liberty to mention upon notice. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given the appearing parties on priority basis.
-
2012 (4) TMI 693 - ITAT CHENNAI
Revision u/s 263 - Held that:- For the purpose of section 263, it is not necessary for the Commissioner of Income-tax to make a final adjudication of the issues. If he finds prima facie that certain relevant aspects of the assessment have not been examined by the assessing authority, which has made the assessment order erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue, the Commissioner of Income-tax is within his competence to invoke section 263.
As far as the present case is concerned, the assessment order passed by the assessing authority is a very cryptic order where there is no discussion regarding certain vital issues arising from the assessment.
-
2012 (4) TMI 692 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... , the petitioner has already paid more than 50 of the tax assessed and, therefore, it is unjust and arbitrary to direct the petitioner to pay the balance amount even in instalments insofar as the matter is pending in appeal before the appellate authority. 2. I have heard the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Income Tax Department also. 3. Now that the petitioner has filed Ext.P3 stay petition before the 2nd respondent-appellate authority, it is only appropriate that the appellate authority passes orders on the same expeditiously. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions The 2nd respondent shall consider and pass orders on Ext.P3 stay petition, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. Till the 2nd respondent passes orders on Ext.P3 stay petition, coercive proceedings for recovery of the balance amount due from the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance.
-
2012 (4) TMI 691 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... , the petitioner has already paid more than 50 of the tax assessed and, therefore, it is unjust and arbitrary to direct the petitioner to pay the balance amount even in instalments insofar as the matter is pending in appeal before the appellate authority. 2. I have heard the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Income Tax Department also. 3. Now that the petitioner has filed Ext.P3 stay petition before the 2nd respondent-appellate authority, it is only appropriate that the appellate authority passes orders on the same expeditiously. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions The 2nd respondent shall consider and pass orders on Ext.P3 stay petition, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. Till the 2nd respondent passes orders on Ext.P3 stay petition, coercive proceedings for recovery of the balance amount due from the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance.
-
2012 (4) TMI 690 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM
Provisions of sec.40(a)(ia) - all payments made during the course of the year or it would apply only to the expenditure which remain payable as at the end of relevant year - Held that:- Accordingly, by following the decision rendered by the Special bench referred Merilyn Shipping & Transports (2012 (4) TMI 290 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM) we hold that the provisions of sec.40(a)(ia) would apply only to the expenditure which remain payable as at the end of the relevant financial year. In the instant case, the entire expenditure has been paid during the course of the previous year and no amount remains payable as at the year end. Accordingly, we set aside the order of CIT(A) on this issue and direct the Assessing Officer to delete both the additions referred.
............
|
