|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 61 to 80 of 213 Records
-
1982 (7) TMI 154 - ITAT HYDERABAD-B
Private Company, Supreme Court, Wealth Tax ... ... ... ... ..... ccording to the accepted judicial principle from the break-up value and no such discount has been given by the GTO and even the value as computed under the Wealth-tax Rules does not provide for such discount. Therefore, the case goes outside the purview of rule 10(2) and the market value of the shares would have to be determined. When we come to the aspect that it would be the market value of the shares that will have to be determined, then the ratio of the Supreme Court in the case of Mahadeo Jalan as reiterated in the case of Kusumben becomes applicable. The Commissioner (Appeals) has only directed that the value of the shares should be computed in accordance with such principles. The decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) is, therefore, unexceptionable and accordingly the appeal of the revenue would stand dismissed. 7. The same decision would hold good in respect of GT Appeal Nos. 18 and 19 (Hyd.) of 1981. 8. In the result, all the three departmental appeals are dismissed.
-
1982 (7) TMI 153 - ITAT HYDERABAD-B
Assessment Year, Minor Child, Previous Year, Share Income ... ... ... ... ..... he properties belonged to the HUF for the years under appeal. But as pointed out by the Supreme Court in the case of C. N. Arunachala Mudaliar the intention of the donor has to be gathered from the language of the document along with the surrounding circumstances. In the case of Periakaruppan, the Supreme Court has taken note of the fact that for many years following the gift the assessee had filed returns in the status of an individual in respect of the properties gifted and was being assessed as such as one of the surrounding circumstances. As pointed out earlier, apart from placing sole reliance upon the term putra poutra paramparya , no other surrounding circumstance is referred or relied on behalf of the assessee to show that the intention of the donor was to gift the properties in question to the assessee to be owned and enjoyed as belonging to his joint family. For the foregoing reasons, we confirm the orders of the Commissioner (Appeals). 9. The appeals are dismissed.
-
1982 (7) TMI 152 - ITAT HYDERABAD-A
... ...
... ... ..... 3-74 in the case of Smt. T. Venkatasubamma, Vijayawada vs. GTO, G-Ward, Vijayawada. In that case, the Tribunal on similar facts as arising in this appeal, by following the judgment of the Gujarat High Court in the case of CGT, Gujarat-I vs. Chhotalal Mohanlal (1974) 97 ITR 393 (Guj) held that, when minors are admitted to the benefits of partnership, it cannot be said that the adult partners had entered into any transaction with them and, therefore, the provisions of s. 2 (xxiv) (d) would not apply. By respectfully following the said order of the Tribunal and also the ratio of the decision of the Gujarat High Court as reported in (1974) 97 ITR 393 (Guj) we also hold that when the minor was admitted to the benefits of partnership with the consent of the remaining partner there is no transfer of property within the meaning of s. 2 (xxiv) (d) of the GT Act. Accordingly we set aside the order passed by the authorities below on this point and allow the appeal filed by the assessee.
-
1982 (7) TMI 151 - ITAT DELHI-E
... ...
... ... ..... acity of Gopi Ram. At the same time, Gopi Ram rsquo s ownership of F.D. Receipt in Punjab National Bank to the tune of Rs. 10,000 at an earlier, though remote, point of time was not disputed on revenue rsquo s side. Net result is that, at best, present case was one of rejection of assessee rsquo s explanation as to the source of a certain sum. Whereas that aspect could justify inclusion of that sum as assessee rsquo s deemed income in its assessment, that by itself is not sufficient to constitute base of penalty for concealment. At the time when the return of total income was filed by the assessee on14th Aug., 1973, the firm little knew that its explanation as to the source of cash credit entry would ultimately be rejected by the ITO, There is no evidence that the sum in question constituted assessee firm rsquo s income earned during the previous year under consideration. Penalty in question could not, therefore, be sustained. The same is hereby deleted. 9. Appeal is allowed.
-
1982 (7) TMI 150 - ITAT DELHI-D
Salaries, Perquisite ... ... ... ... ..... ect of the income includible under section 2(24)(iii). Another point to be noticed is that the words used in section 2(24)(iv) are the value of any benefit or perquisite... obtained from a company... . The words obtained from a company would indicate that there must be a legal basis for a benefit or a perquisite. Though the company is not debarred from giving a loan to its employees, the provisions of section 2(24)(iv) can be made applicable only if there is a legal basis for obtaining an interest-free loan. In our opinion, therefore, the provisions of section 2(24)(iv) are not applicable to this case. 17. We may state that the calculation of the figure of perquisite at Rs. 1,19,158 was not assailed before us in any manner. 18. For the aforesaid reasons we reverse the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) and hold that the sum of Rs. 1,19,158 is taxable as the income of the assessee under section 17(2)(iii) read with section 2(24)(iii). 19. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1982 (7) TMI 149 - ITAT DELHI-C
... ...
... ... ..... nately a fact that it costs quite a large sum of money to come to this Court and this Court has become untouchable and unapproachable by many litigants who cannot afford the large expenses involved in fighting a litigation in this Court. IT is, therefore, all the more necessary that State, which have public accountability in respect of their actions, should not lightly rush to this Court to challenge a judgement of the High Court which is plainly and manifestly correct and drag the opposite party in unnecessary expense, part of which would, in any event, not be compensated by award of cost. The present appeal is an instance of the kind of unnecessary and futile litigation which the State Government can and should avoid. 12. On our part we can only say that on the facts and in the circumstances of the assessee rsquo s case, all the facts necessary and material were with the ITO at the original assessment state, and we leave it there. 13. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.
-
1982 (7) TMI 148 - ITAT DELHI-B
... ...
... ... ..... te of or the second valuation report of the Govt. Valuer which is three years after completion of the construction. I am of the view that the second report of the assessees valuer is closer to the completion of the construction of the property, a better guideline than the one adapted by the ITO. I therefore, accept the second valuation report of the assessee rsquo valuer at Rs. 64,275. If I adopt that valuation, the difference between the cost of construction shown by the assessee and the cost of construction as valued by the Registered Valuer is only Rs. 500. The difference between cost being too petty has to be ignored. I, therefore, while taking the second valuation report of the assessee rsquo s valuer as providing a better guideline accept the cost of construction as shown by the assessee. The addition of Rs. 29,400 is deleted. If the assessee has paid any excess tax on account of this addition, the same should be refunded. 5. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed.
-
1982 (7) TMI 147 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... asonable cause. 5. That facts stated above in fact show that the assessee made conscious efforts to comply with the provisions of law. This is clear from the returns having been filed within time, albeit with the signature of the Attorney only. The assessee also voluntarily filed the returns on 28th March 1977 when the mistake was discovered. In the case of the assessee in WTA Nos. 238, 239 and 240 of 1975-76, IT Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench in its order dt. 12th June 1978 considered the delay resulting from similar mistake of the appeals being filed by Shri Dalip Singh, General Power of Attorney Holder. The Tribunal held that the delay was due to reasonable cause and condoned the delay. If the entirety of the facts and circumstances of the case is taken into consideration, there is no reason for imposition of penalty for any of the assessment yeas under appeal. Therefore, for the reasons recorded supra, we cancel the penalties for both the years. 6. Appeals allowed.
-
1982 (7) TMI 146 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... ssessment under s. 147 the limitation in respect of the issue only is to be governed as per s. 149 and the assessments are to be framed within limitation provided under s. 153. Since we have annulled the assessment, we are not dealing with the issues pertaining to merit of addition because the same do not survive for consideration and does not call for adjudication. 11. Coming to the assessee s appeals under s. 271(1)(a), the ld. counsel for the assessee has placed his reliance on the case of N. Khan and Brothers, Partap Steel Rolling Mills and Assam Automobile and Accessories Agency. But we do not find any use of discussing their contentions and counter-contentions in penalty for later filing under s. 271(1)(a) was we have annulled the assessment itself and when the very bottom of the penalty case under s. 271(1)(a) is washed out, penalty cannot stand on this basis alone penalty order deserves to be cancelled. 12. In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed.
-
1982 (7) TMI 145 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... Desai vs. Union of India and Ors., has succinctly held that the signing of the proposed order itself is of no significance because what is required to be signed is the forwarding letter which authenticates that the accompaniment to the forwarding letter is the draft of the proposed order of assessment. In the case before us, the forwarding letter was duly signed. It authenticated that the accompanied order was a draft assessment order. The fact that such an order bore the signature of the ITO would not make it a final order. In view of the changed position of law, the ratio of the Hon ble Punjab and Haryana High Court judgment in the case of S. Sewa Singh Gill cited supra, has, therefore, no application to the case of the assessee. Similarly, the judgment of the Hon ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Sham Lal Cited supra, has no applicability to the facts of the assessee s case. We, therefore, find the appeal of the assessee without any merit. It is dismissed.
-
1982 (7) TMI 144 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... late authority himself had confirmed the disallowance of extra shift allowance on such items like switch boards and capacitors. Hence there cannot be any grievance against the order of the first appellate authority on this point. It is accordingly confirmed. For the very same reasons and the fact that depreciation has been allowed to the assessee at the general rate, the CIT was not justified in withdrawing extra shift allowance granted by the ITO. 9. To summarise, we hold that the CIT had jurisdiction under s. 263 of the Act in the instant case, he was justified to order withdrawal of weighted deduction in respect of all the items as he did except in stationary where he should have ordered withdrawal only for 50 per cent of the amount whereas the ITO was justified in granting extra shift allowance to the assessee in respect of generators and motors and the CIT was not justified to order its withdrawal under s. 263 of the Act. 10. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed.
-
1982 (7) TMI 143 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... eedings held by us as applicable above also finds support from the amendment of law by the insertion of s. 20A to the WT Act by Finance (No. 2) Act, 1980, w.e.f. 1st April, 1980 which specifically provides that any partial partition after 31st Dec., 1978 will not be recognised from the asst. yr. 1980-81. Therefore, there is no reason not to take the view that we have adopted for giving the treatment to the partitioned properties in income-tax and in wealth-tax assessments. 13. We would also like to observe that it is now well settled that where two reasonable views are possible for the interpretation of taxing statute the one that favours the subject is to be adopted. Please see 1973 CTR (SC) 370 (1973) 89 ITR 236 (SC) and (1980) 122 ITR 283 (Mad). In this case, the two reasonable views are possible. Therefore the one that favours the assessee must be followed. On this account also the assessee is entitled to succeed. 14. The appeals of the Revenue are, therefore, dismissed.
-
1982 (7) TMI 142 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... half of the said share was clubbed with the income of the assessee under s. 64 of the IT Act. Since it is nowhere laid down that half of the share income for the A.Y. 1976-77 was to be clubbed with the income of the assessee, the balance amount of share income of the two minor sons, viz. Rs. 20,630 (Rs. 10,563 Rs. 10,087) may also be added back to the taxable income of the assessee. This addition will involve addl. tax demand of Rs. 12,333. From the above details, it is clear that the reassessment proceedings were initiated as a consequence of audit objection. In the light of this discussion and for the reasons given by the AAC, we confirm her action. 6. From the above finding, it is clear that the Tribunal s decision is based on Supreme Court judgment in the case of Indian and Eastern Newspaper Society and, therefore, it would only be academic in case a question is referred. The Revenue s request is, therefore, rejected. 7. In the result, reference application is dismissed.
-
1982 (7) TMI 141 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... r right to legitimate deduction warranted by law as noticed in respect of development rebate reserve in Circular No. 189 dt. 3rd January 1976, we do not find any basis for the view that rectification can be permitted only were there is insufficiency and not where there has been a total omission. If in both cases the rectification was only of a bona fide mistake, there is no justification for coming to two different conclusions as between them. In any view of the matter, the departmental appeal has to be dismissed. 12. Under the peculiar circumstances in the instant case, the assessee could not do anything more than what it had in revising the profit and loss account and balance sheet indicating the provisions for investment allowance reserve and in the light of Punjab and Haryana High Court decision the assessee s claim ought to have been accepted by the CIT (appeals). The action of the CIT (Appeals) is, therefore, revised and in the result, the assessee s appeal is allowed.
-
1982 (7) TMI 140 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
Investment Allowance ... ... ... ... ..... w as noticed in respect of development rebate reserve in Circular No. 189 dated 3-1-1976. We do not find any basis for the view that rectification can be permitted only where there is insufficiency and not where there has been a total omission. If in both cases the rectification was only of a bona fide mistake, there is no justification for coming to two different conclusions as between them. In any view of the matter, the departmental appeal has to be dismissed. 12. Under the peculiar circumstances in the instant case, the assessee could not do anything more than what it had done in revising the profit and loss account and balance sheet indicating the provision for investment allowance reserve and in the light of the Punjab and Haryana High Court decision in Sardar Singh Sachdeva, the assessee s claim ought to have been accepted by the Commissioner (Appeals). The orders of the Commissioner (Appeals) is, therefore, reversed and in the result, the assessee s appeal is allowed.
-
1982 (7) TMI 139 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
Assessment Year, Claim For Depreciation, Dissolution Of Firm, Same Business ... ... ... ... ..... that the assessee right from the first year has not given up the issue. Undoubtedly at one stage it came before the Tribunal but it was never adjudicated on merit as the assessee s appeal was only dismissed for default. The assessee s contention is, therefore, accepted and the ITO is directed to recompute the assessee s claim of depreciation on the basis of actual cost of Rs. 3,80,000 as splitted above, building Rs. 1,50,000, machinery Rs. 1,50,000 and racks Rs. 80,000 and deducting the depreciation allowed to the assessee in all the previous years from 1973-74 to 1975-76 should be deducted out of the same and depreciation should be allowed on the balance. From clause 3 of the dissolution deed, mention of internal bet amongst the continuing and outgoing partners regarding valuation of assets is also available and it has never been the case of the revenue that it was out of collusion or fraudulent assignment of valuation to the assets. 11. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1982 (7) TMI 138 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
Assessment Order, Reference To IAC ... ... ... ... ..... ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Mrs. Meeraben P. Desai, has succinctly held that the signing of the proposed order itself is of no significance because what is required to be signed is the forwarding letter which authenticates that the accompaniment to the forwarding letter is the draft of the proposed order of assessment. In the case before us, the forwarding letter was duly signed. It authenticated that the accompanied order was a draft assessment order. The fact that such an order bore the signature of the ITO would not make it a final order. In view of the changed position of law, the ratio of the Hon ble Punjab and Haryana High Court judgment in the case of S. Sewa Singh Gill has, therefore, no application to the case of the assessee. Similarly, the judgment of the Hon ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Sham Lal has no applicability to the facts of the assessee s case. We, therefore, find the appeal of the assessee without any merit, It is dismissed.
-
1982 (7) TMI 137 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
Business Loss ... ... ... ... ..... assessee s claim, therefore, was wrongly rejected. The assessee is entitled to claim as ordinary business loss arising account of valuation of the Government and trustee securities at the end of the previous year relevant to each of the assessment years under appeal, This the assessee has done. The assessee has followed this method consistently even in the subsequent assessment years. This is permissible method in law. This is also permissible on account of commercial principles of accountancy in carrying on the business of a banking institution. Therefore, the claim of the assessee is admissible. For each of the assessment years, the claim of the assessee is accepted and is directed to be allowed. We set aside the orders of the authorities below on this issue and direct the ITO to accept the claim of the assessee in recomputing the income while giving effect to this order. 26. Appeals of the assessee allowed and the appeal of the revenue is considered allowed for statistics.
-
1982 (7) TMI 136 - ITAT CALCUTTA-C
... ...
... ... ..... were not satisfied. The loan creditor advanced loan to the assessee by cheques and those cheques were honoured by the respective banks. Therefore, we find it difficult to disbelieve about the credit-worthless of the creditor. The loan creditor who confirmed the loan transaction originally, might, to save his own skin, have given different declarations to the Revenue in regard to the genuineness of such loan transaction. The Tribunal, while dealing with the assessee s Wealth-tax appeal for the same assessment year in WTA 81/Cal/73-74/WT IH-3/74-75 and appeals regarding income-tax matters for the subsequent assessment years in ITA Nos.5626 to 5627/Cal/71-72,had held that loan of Rs. 50,000 was genuine and proceedings under s. 147(a) were not valid. In view of our aforesaid discussion, we cancel the reassessment made under s. 147(a)/143(3) and consider it unnecessary to discuss the cases relied on by the ld. departmental representative. 7. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1982 (7) TMI 135 - ITAT CALCUTTA-C
Assessment Year, Fixed Assets, General Reserve ... ... ... ... ..... these assets had since been fully depreciated . The amount transferred from revaluation reserve to general reserve was Rs. 78,69,681 equivalent to the amount by which the value of such assets now fully depreciated were written off at the time of devaluation . This being the factual position, we feel that the transfer of the revaluation reserve to general reserve was justified on account of the change in the nature and the quality of the reserve. The reserve to the extent of Rs. 78,69,681 was no more a revaluation reserve. It rather represented accumulation of the company s profits and other surpluses other than those created by the revaluation of the assets and, therefore, the Explanation 1 to rule 2 would not apply to the said sum of Rs. 78,69,681. The exclusion of the said sum, while computing the capital of the assessee-company under rule 1 would not, in our opinion, be justified. We, accordingly, reverse the orders of the authorities below and allow the assessee s appeal.
........
|
