|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 41 to 60 of 111 Records
-
1978 (6) TMI 71 - ITAT COCHIN
... ...
... ... ..... assessee has not given up his profession and was not exchanging his profession for any service in the State Government. The employment under the State Government as Advocate-General was temporary and incidental to his profession and he had no intention of permanently engaging himself as a salaried servant of the State Government. For conducing cases in Courts, the assessee has been engaged by the State Government as an expert in his profession and the engagement is an incident in the course of his professional career and the remuneration which he received through that engagement is only professional income and not salary. We, therefore, hold that the remuneration received by the assessee for making appearances in Courts and conducting cases for the State Government can assessed only as professional income and the assessee is entitled to the deductions claimed. Accordingly, we confirm the order of the AAC. 14. In the result, the Departmental appeals fail and stand dismissed.
-
1978 (6) TMI 70 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... usion that he did. The assessee is a doctor by profession and he went abroad with a twin purpose of study-cum-tour. The fact that during the course of his visit abroad, he whetted up his knowledge for keeping himself abreast of the latest development in the profession that he was carrying on, would not make the expenditure. The assessee is a specialist in tuberculosis and in the process has to study about organs of the human body and has to know how the disease in which he specialises affects the various organs. There is no indication that the assessee studied abroad entirely different branch of medicines and thereby acquired knowledge which he did not have before. He had only brought the existing knowledge abreast by associating himself with the latest technique prevalent abroad. In our opinion, it is clearly an expenditure of revenue nature, and it was rightly allowed by the AAC. The appeal of the Revenue on this issue also fails. 5. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.
-
1978 (6) TMI 69 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... lf was submitted. The list of commercial sites sold on 24th March, 1974, in our opinion, was very relevant to the case and there being auction sales and being in the public knowledge even if the transferor and the transferee did not point out such sales, the Valuation Officer was aware and should have taken notice of the same. In fact, instances at page 19 would show that on 24th March, 1974, even godown sites plots measuring 187.83 sq. yds. were sold in auction between Rs. 56,100 and Rs. 64,100 alongwith the necessary benefits attached with the general auction sales and when godown sites constructions were fetching much higher rent as compared to SCFs. Constructions, the transferor s and the transferee s case get strengthened that the valuation, recorded in the sale deed, was not lower than the market value. Pages 20 to 24 we have not taken on record. Pages 31 to 35 are considered very relevant to the dispute and were taken on record by us under Rs. 20. 18. Appeals allowed.
-
1978 (6) TMI 68 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... ons of s.182 (1) (ii) clearly stipulates that share of each partner is assessable in his/her hands and in this context the definition of a partner has to be seen which include minor who is admitted to the benefits of partnership. The argument raised was that, seen in the contest of s.182(1) when the assessee represents his HUF in a partnership firm and his wife and/or minor child is also a partner, s.64 (1) (i) and (iii) cannot be brought into operation. 9. For the Revenue, Miss. R.K. chahal submitted that she was relying on the same arguments which were recorded in Kishori Lal s(4) case. 10. For the reasons recorded by us in Kishori Lal s(4) case and discussion in this order, we hold that the provisions of s.64(1)(i) and (iii) were wrongly brought into operation to club the assessee s wife s and/or his minor child s income with the individual income of the assessee under s.64(1)(i) and (iii) of the Act. The additions made are vacated. 11. The assessee s appeals are allowed.
-
1978 (6) TMI 67 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... ghtage in terms of s. 35B. 6. The only remaining point is regarding depreciation claim disallowance of Rs. 4,166. The AAC rejected the entire claim of depreciation of the assessee by observing that since for the asst. yr. 1973-74 the assessee s claim was turned down, for the asst. yr. 1974-75 also the claim could not be considered. We, however, notice that the assessee s claim for Rs. 4,750 for cars used by the Managing Director and Director was allowed by the AAC The reason given is that since the cars were provided to the Managing Director and the Director, as per terms of service, there could be no question of disallowing any part of the expenses. After hearing the parties, we direct the ITO to allow the assessee s claim of depreciation in respect of cars for which running expenses are allowed. Actual computation, we leave to the ITO 7. In the result, whereas the assessee s appeal for the asst. yr. 1973-74 is partly allowed, it appeal for the asst. yr. 1974-75 is allowed.
-
1978 (6) TMI 66 - ITAT CALCUTTA-E
... ...
... ... ..... the Revenue to take such a stand now which was never the case of the ITO at any stage. We agree with the learned counsel for the assessee that the Revenue cannot make up at this stage the deficiency of the ITO in this regard and cannot make an improvement upon the ITO s case at this stage. 6. Having regard to the above considerations, we hold that the ITO was in error in initiating reassessment proceeding under s. 147(a) r/w s. 148 of the Act, that the reassessment proceedings so taken by the ITO were not valid in law and the AAC was in error in sustaining the reassessment proceedings taken by the ITO. We accordingly cancel the re-assessment made under s. 147(a) of the Act and reverse the order of the AAC on this score. 7. Having cancelled the reassessment on the above ground, we consider it unnecessary to go into the merits of the addition of Rs. 30,000 treated by the authorities below as the assessee s income from other sources. 8. The appeal is allowed as indicated above.
-
1978 (6) TMI 65 - ITAT BOMBAY-D
... ...
... ... ..... that the ITO simply dealt with the rectification applications and held against the assessee on the ground that there were no mistakes apparent from record which could be rectified under s. 154. In our view the ITO while passing an order under s. 143(1) is competent to add back only the amounts which prima facie disallowable and the claim made by the assessee in the returns filed for both the years is not such as to fall in the category of items which are inadmissible without further inquiry. Having regard to the description of the claim, it is clear that the expenditure claimed by the assessee as deduction in the computation of income ought not to have been disallowed by the ITO under s. 143(1) and the disallowance in clear contravention of the provisions of law, is itself a mistake apparent from the record which can be rectified under s. 154 of the Act. In view of above, we confirm the order of the AAC 6. In the result both the Departmental appeals fail and stand dismissed.
-
1978 (6) TMI 64 - ITAT BOMBAY-C
Development Allowance, Weighted Deduction ... ... ... ... ..... n relevant for finalising sales. From them it is seen that the assessee gets information about the foreign markets. We have held in the similar case heard along with these appeals that the nature of the expenditure being such, it would clearly fall within sub-clauses (i), (ii) and (vi). We confirm the AAC s decision on this too. 12. With regard to the other item, salary and bonus, we have the annexed order outlining the principles which could be fairly adopted in such matters. As the necessary materials are neither collected nor before us to determine how much any of this expenditure can properly and justly be taken as on activities falling within the sub-clause of section 35B(1)(b) other than sub-clause (iii), here too we direct the ITO to redecide the point according to law and in the light of our observations. 13. For the purposes indicated above, we restore the matter to the ITO for fresh disposal. For statistical purpose, both the appeals may be taken as allowed in part.
-
1978 (6) TMI 63 - ITAT BANGALORE
... ...
... ... ..... sused. On the other hand, he has failed to meet the evidence produced by the assessee before the AAC which was duly put to him. The Departmental representative also relied on a decision of the Tribunal in ITA No. 1054/Bang/1976-77 dt. 12th May, 1978. That case is clearly distinguishable. In that case the assessee had shown less than 30 per cent and reliance was placed on a comparable case of 36 per cent yield. The assessee did not apparently dispute that 36 per cent was reasonable and actually tried to show that the correct yield was about 35 per cent but, however, this claim was found to be incorrect and that the correct yield shown was only 30 per cent. It was in these circumstances that the Tribunal adopted a yield of 36 per cent. That case is, therefore, clearly distinguishable from the assessee s case and is distinguished from that case. In the circumstances, we see no infirmity whatever in the order of the AAC which is accordingly confirmed. 5. The appeal is dismissed.
-
1978 (6) TMI 62 - ITAT BANGALORE
... ...
... ... ..... counsel for the accountable person. Unfortunately we find that neither the Asstt. Controller nor the Appellate Controller has proceeded on the correct lines in so far as on the partition between the father and the son, the two coparceners at the time of death, the unmarried daughter would, under. s 8(1) of the Mysore Hindu Law Womens Right, Act 1933, have 1/9 th share in the properties. The shares of the deceased and his father would be 4/9 each. The 1/9 th share of the unmarried daughter would work out to Rs. 11,037 and that was what the accountable person had claimed. However, since the accountable person is not in appeal and the Appellate Controller has allowed only a sum of Rs. 10,000 all that can be done now is to dismiss the Departmental appeal since the Appellate Controller has allowed less than that was the share of the unmarried daughter, at the time of death of her brother, Shri V.H. Venkatasiva Reddy. The appeals are without merits and are, accordingly, dismissed.
-
1978 (6) TMI 61 - ITAT BANGALORE
... ...
... ... ..... 0,000 represented the concealed income of the firm for this year. The ITO has not detected any fault or concealment in the accounts of the firm which would justify the levy of penalty. Although the explanation to s. 271(1)(c) applies, on the fact of it, there is neither fraud nor gross or wilful neglect on the part of the assessee in not returning this sum as its income because the assessee s case is that it never represented its income at all and the amount is actually brought in by the guardian of the minors. There is nothing to show on record that the narration in the books of account that the guardian of the minors had brought this amount was not the correct narration although the explanation regarding the source of the amount has been rejected by application of s. 68. We, therefore, hold that on facts the levy of penalty cannot be sustained even though the addition has been sustained in the quantum appeals. The appeal is accordingly allowed and the penalty is cancelled.
-
1978 (6) TMI 60 - HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Blended lubricating oils and greases - Manufacture ... ... ... ... ..... t Schedule. The lubricating oil used by the appellant for blending with other ingredients for manufacturing greases were still mineral oil and, therefore, the finished products of the appellant Company were fully covered by Item No. 11B. The alleged fact that the appellant used duty paid lubricating oil in the manufacture of its finished product might entitle it to apply for Central Excise Rules. The learned Single Judge correctly pointed out that in case the appellant used lubricating oil on which duty or excise had been already paid, it could have applied to the Collector for allowing credit of the duty already paid on such materials. But on this ground the appellant cannot claim that greases manufactured by it would not be at all liable to excise duty. 6. In the above view, we hold that this appeal has no merit and it should fall. We accordingly, dismiss this appeal without any order as to costs. 7. Let operation of this order remain stayed for three weeks, as prayed for.
-
1978 (6) TMI 59 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Civil suit not entertainable if the customs officer acted bona fide - Customs duty - Affidavit-in-Opposition - Refund - Duty paid without protest - Admissibility
-
1978 (6) TMI 58 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
Valuation - Service/Handling charges not includible ... ... ... ... ..... ods, as it appears, were also available for sale at the factory gate without such service handling charge. 3. In view of the above, Government of India agree that such service/handling charge cannot be included in the assessable value of the aerated water manufactured and sold by the petitioners. 4. The revision application is, therefore allowed.
-
1978 (6) TMI 57 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
... ...
... ... ..... stant Collector and not merely the portion which was not time-barred. 5. Government of India observe that all the pleas advanced by the party were not properly considered at the lower level, the Appellate Collector did not want to pass any order on merit but chose to remand the case to the Assistant Collector but instead of remanding the entire claim he limited himself to the claim which were within time in terms of Rule 11 read with Rule 173J of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. Government of India observes that the concluding sentence of the order-in-appeal that the rest of refund claim which is over one year old is time-barred, its rejection by the Assistant Collector is, therefore upheld is not correct in fact and in law because the Assistant Collector did not pass any order rejecting some of the claims as time-barred. Government of India, therefore, sets aside the order-in-appeal and orders that the case be remanded in toto to Assistant Collector for denovo consideration.
-
1978 (6) TMI 56 - HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Refunds - Protest must be specific - Involuntary payment, and 'payment under protest' - Distinction between
-
1978 (6) TMI 55 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
Copper Pipes & Tubes - Cylinders and bushes ... ... ... ... ..... t their products should not be classified under Item 26A (3) as pipes and tubes which merely enable the flow of a liquid/gas from end to the other. Brass cylinders and bushes are component parts of water pump for which special design and quality have been imparted. The bushes are brass cylinders cut into small pieces after machining. The petitioners have produced certificate from various parties who purchased bushes to the effect that bushes are parts of a hand-pump. To prove their point that the definition of goods in a taxing statute should be the one which is commonly understood in trade, the petitioners have cited the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Healthway Dairy Product v. Union of India 1978 E.L.T. (J 457) and other judgments. Government of India accept the pleas of the petitioners and observe that the cylinders and bushes which are made through casting do not come under item 26A (3) Central Excise Tariff. The Revision Application is allowed accordingly.
-
1978 (6) TMI 54 - HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
Job worker - Exemption notifications - Uniformity in interpretation - Advisability of ... ... ... ... ..... tation, whether right or wrong, is supplied all over the country and situation like the present one where the job working factories - in Haryana and Maharashtra are at an advantage as compared to similar factories in the State of Gujarat, may be avoided. 14. During the pendency of these writ petitions, each of the respective petitioners has been asked at the instance of the Central Government to provide bank guarantees. Because the stand taken up by the Central Excise Authorities is totally unsustainable, we direct the Central Excise Authorities to pay the charges paid by the respective petitioner for furnishing bank guarantee - the amount of such charges to be certified by the respective bank, to the Excise authorities and on such certification, the amount to be paid by the Central excise Authorities to the petitioner concerned. The respondents will pay the costs of each of the petitioners in each of the four matters. Rule is made absolute in each of the above four matters.
-
1978 (6) TMI 53 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Capital Of Company, Chargeable Profits, Computation Of Capital, Held By Assessee ... ... ... ... ..... re is no dispute in this case that if the shares in question had yielded any income by way of dividends such income would have been deducted under rule 1(viii) of the First Schedule in computing the chargeable profits. If there was no income the deduction will be zero. But such shares constitute assets the income from which is required to be excluded under rule 1(viii) of the First Schedule for purposes of rule 2 of the Second Schedule. We are of the opinion that under rule 2 of the Second Schedule of the Act, the sum of Rs. 26,33,201 representing the cost of the shares in Indian companies to the assessee from which the assessee received no dividends should be excluded from the capital as computed under rule 1 of the Second Schedule of the Act, that is, the capital as computed under rule 1 of the Second Schedule should be diminished by the said sum of Rs. 26,33,201. The liability of the assessee should be computed on that basis. The question referred is answered accordingly.
-
1978 (6) TMI 52 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Dispose Of, Income Tax Act ... ... ... ... ..... at in view of this authoritative pronouncement of the Supreme Court, the original order passed on October 30, 1967, cannot be sustained and the Tribunal was required and would be required to dispose of the assessee s appeal on merits. This is the obvious position and since the assessee s appeal would be required to be disposed of by the Tribunal on merits we will not go into and answer the question referred to us. In view of the position explained above and since the appeal would have to be disposed of on its merits, the question referred to us is not answered. It is made clear that what we have observed earlier amounts to a direction to the Tribunal making it obligatory for it to consider the order made by it on October 30,1967, as invalid in view of the decision of the Supreme Court and the Tribunal would be required to dispose of the assessee s appeal on merits in view of the Supreme Court decision above referred to. The parties will bear their own costs of the reference.
|
