|
Advanced Search Options
Income Tax - Case Laws
Showing 1 to 20 of 1315 Records
-
1986 (12) TMI 387 - JAMMU & KASHMIR HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... Bakshi that the learned Single Judge has no power to pass such an order under section 132. Passing of any order in aid of seeking observation of the provisions of the Act would depend on the facts of each case. The learned Single Judge is seized of the matter, therefore, he has to decide the application as also the objections filed by the respondents on merits having regard to the facts and in the circumstances of the case. 8. We are sure that as and when Mr. Bakshi appears before him, the learned Single Judge would accord consideration to the objections of the appellants and thereafter pass orders as warranted under law. 9. We have not found any illegality or infirmity in the impugned orders. These do not decide any right of the appellant, much less to their disadvantage. As such no interference with the said orders is called for. We accordingly refrain to interfere with the impugned orders. 10. With these observations, these three appeals as also C. M. Ps. are disposed of.
-
1986 (12) TMI 375 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... wered in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee in view of the decision of this Court in the case of Instalment Supply (P) Ltd. vs. CIT (1984) 41 CTR (Del) 334 (1984) 149 ITR 457(Del). We answer the question accordingly for that assessment year. So far as the asst. yr. 1972-73 is concerned, however, counsel for the CIT points out that the applicable provision was really s. 40A(v) introduced w.e.f. 1st April, 1972 by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1971. It appears that this amendment has not been noticed by the Tribunal. We, therefore, feel that the Tribunal was not justified in directing the ITO to work out the disallowable expenditure under s. 40(a)(v). We leave it open to the Tribunal to dispose of the appeal in relative to this assessment year afresh on this point in the light of the above answer. We are, however, expressing no opinion on the scope and interpretation of s. 40A(v) vis-&-vis the disallowance in question 6. References are disposed of as above. No costs.
-
1986 (12) TMI 176 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
CLASSIFICATION ... ... ... ... ..... iew of the above discussion we hold that the lsquo Soni Cassette Duplicating Machine rsquo falls under Heading 92.01/ 13. Interpretative Rule 3A of the Customs Tariff clearly lays down that the heading which provides the most specific description lsquo shall be preferred. The Revenue had not issued any review show cause notice. The Appellate Collector of Customs had assessed the same under Heading 85.18/27(1) which carried the rate of duty at the rate of 60 at the relevant time whereas under Heading 92.01/13 the rate of duty is 100 . Since no review proceedings were started by the Revenue we further direct that the Revenue will not withdraw the benefit already granted by the Appellate Collector of Customs. We further hold that the classificaton given by the Appellate Collector of Customs under Heading 85.18/27(1) was not correct in Law and the imported goods do not fall under Heading 84.59(2) of CTA as claimed by the appellants. With these observations the appeal is rejected.
-
1986 (12) TMI 107 - ITAT PATNA
... ...
... ... ..... the transfer deed of Rs. 1,96,000 The ld. Competent authority however, had preferred the valuation made by the Inspector to initiate proceedings. The valuation made by the Valuation Cell is to be taken as opinion of expert. The ld. Competent authority has not given any congent reason of not following the report of the Valuation Cell and we also do not find anything in the report of the Inspector as reason for differing with the report of the Valuation Cell. In view of the above, we find that the valuation made by the Valuation Cell Officer should be accepted. Moreover if proper deductions are again allowed to the situation of the land in the land abound by residential unit and much away from the commercial area of Frazer Road the valuation would come to the figure of apparent consideration stated in the transfer deed and the acquisition cannot be made in respect of these transfers. We, therefore, cancel the order of the ld. IAC (Acq.) 6.In the result the appeals are allowed.
-
1986 (12) TMI 106 - ITAT PATNA
... ...
... ... ..... by the ITO to be false. However by and large, the doctrine of CIT vs. Anver Ali (1970) 76 ITR 696 (SC), might well be regarded as having been eroded by Expln. I. The penalty under s. 271(1)(C) this tends to become almost automatic, after Expln. I. We are therefore, fortified by the above opinion. However the quantum of penalty should be based on the graveness of concealment. In this case, we find the ITO has imposed minimum penalty. We therefore do not find any reason to interfere with this order. We are also of the view that the assessee could not substantiate his explanation of the deposits made in this year and his explanations were not in good faith. This conclusion, we have reached in dependently as no appeal against the order of the AAC in respect of quantum was filed before us an we had no occasion to consider the same in quantum appeal. Hence, we set aside the order of the ld. AAC and restore the order of the ITO. 7. In the result, the departmental appeal is allowed.
-
1986 (12) TMI 103 - ITAT NAGPUR
Assessment Proceedings, Gift Tax, High Court, Original Assessment, Reassessment Proceedings ... ... ... ... ..... tion 59(1)(b). The Appellate Controller s order on this point is, accordingly, upheld. 10. In coming to the second ground we find from the Appellate Controller s order that he directed the ACED to allow deduction of the entire stamp duty and gift-tax paid by the Accountable Person including the rebate available to the Accountable Person under section 18A of the Gift-tax Act. The department s grievance is that the deduction under section 18A in the Gift-tax Act is not available to the Accountable Person under the Estate Duty Act. Section 50A of the E.D. Act provides the relief from estate duty where gift-tax has been paid. There is no reference to section 18A of the G.T. Act under section 50A of the E.D. Act. We accordingly modify the Appellate Controller s order and direct the ACED to allow relief from the duty payable in terms of section 50A of the E.D. Act. 11. In the result, the appeal of the Accountable Person is dismissed while the departmental appeal is allowed in part.
-
1986 (12) TMI 101 - ITAT JAIPUR
... ...
... ... ..... ing under s. 213 of the Act. But if the ITO has refused to grant interest it is stated that he can not grant it except in proceedings under s. 154. Now what is the remedy left to the assessee if interest is not granted to him in the first instance. The only remedy is an application and such an application if treated to be under s. 154 would not be competent. This would result in very dangerous consequences. The entire matter would be in the discretion of the ITO. He can make distinctions which will be with out any practical difference. This Bench has also been taking a view in favour of the assessee, so also was the decision in Anup Engg. Ttd. vs. ITO (1983) 36 CTR (Guj) 195 (1984) 145 ITR 105 (Guj). Upon a consideration of these circumstances, we are of the opinion that the assessee should be granted interest when he has made sincere efforts to comply with the law relating to payment of advance-tax which was not much beyond the due date. 4. The appeal is accordingly allowed.
-
1986 (12) TMI 100 - ITAT JAIPUR
... ...
... ... ..... r was brought to our notice either at the time of hearing of the appeal or even later. We are, therefore, of the opinion that there is no force in this appeal, which is hereby dismissed. A. Kalyanasundharam, A.M. mdash I concur with the conclusion arrived at by my ld. brother though I have a feeling that medical expenses which are reimbursed are purely a staff welfare measure and should not be treated as a perquisite in view of the Board s Circular No. 33 dt. 1st Aug., 1955 by which the Department had been treating provisions of medical facilities to the employee and his family as well as the reimbursement as not a perquisite which circular has not been withdrawn till date (V.S. Sundaram s IT Laws mdash 11th Edition). the special Bench of Tribunal in the case, of Glaxo Laboratories (India) Ltd vs. Second ITO (1986) 26 TTJ (Bom) 214 (SB) (1986) 18 ITD 226 (Bom) (SB) had also held such reimbursement of medical expenses as a perquisite for s. 40A(5) which order is binding on us.
-
1986 (12) TMI 99 - ITAT JAIPUR
... ...
... ... ..... change and that the detailed report also for information of the meetings that were held with various industrialists in different countries, cannot be brushed aside as the Court is in the nature of finding new avenues for exports. We have only to uphold the order of the CIT(A) on this issue. The next issue is regarding subsidy being reduced from the cost of plant and machinery for the purpose of depreciation and investment allowance as well as reduction under 80J. The subsidy is not a contribution of cost by the Govt. towards any particular asset and, therefore, cannot be deducted from the cost of asset for the purpose of depreciation and investment allowance. However, for deduction under s. 80J in view of the condition laid down by the Govt. for the grant of subsidy unless and until the period of 5 years lapses it cannot be treated as capital reserve. We accordingly restore the order of the ITO on the issue of s. 80J only. 7. In the result both the appeals are partly allowed.
-
1986 (12) TMI 98 - ITAT JAIPUR
Business Income, Chargeable As, Co-operative Bank ... ... ... ... ..... relatable to the banking business and has to be set off only against the business income. Therefore, for the reasons mentioned above, we quash the order of the CIT (A) on this issue and restore that of the ITO. 6. In the cross-objection, the claim of the assessee is that it realises certain amounts as charges on account of issue of duplicate pass-books, other incidental charges on account of sale of various kinds of stationery, which is clearly used for advancement of loan etc. which have been wrongly treated as income from other sources by the CIT (A). On this issue, there is little doubt that the charges on account of issue of duplicate pass-books and certain other charges incidental to the banking activity, like brokerage and on account of sale of stationery and related items are clearly arising out of the banking business and have to be treated as income from banking only. We allow this claim of the assessee. 7. This para is not reproduced here as it involves minor issue
-
1986 (12) TMI 97 - ITAT JAIPUR
Export Business ... ... ... ... ..... ange Regulation Act, 1973 and the rules made thereunder. The facts in the present case goes clearly to establish that it is not a case of exports made out of India and, therefore, on the primary requirement itself the claim of the assessee must fail. The argument of the assessee that the Ministry of Commerce has notified the supplies made to ONGC and Oil India Ltd. as deemed exports is for the limited purpose of that Ministry and for encouraging the manufacturers of India to come forward and compete with the foreigners so as to act as import substitution. Unless that particular notification is adopted by the CBDT as the notification so specified in sub-section 2(b) of section 80HHC, we are afraid the claim of the assessee cannot be accepted. If it was an intention to treat these as deemed exports even for the Act, a notification to that effect would have been issued in the absence of which the claim of the assessee has only to be rejected. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.
-
1986 (12) TMI 96 - ITAT JABALPUR
... ...
... ... ..... constitute a reasonable cause for the delay that had already taken place in the filing of the appeal. The original decision not to file appeal was taken by the assessee after due deliberation and consultation. This decision was not taken under a mistaken notion but after a proper legal advice. Simply because a different counsel gives a different opinion, the original advice given by the counsel in the normal discharge of his functions cannot be regarded being any or as a mistake. At the best it is a case of two opinions. The assessee rsquo s application for condonation of delay is in our opinion in the circumstances stated above entirely misconceived. As such we see no reason to interfere with the order of the ld. CIT(A) in rejecting the assessee rsquo s appeal in limine as time-barred. Order of the ld. AAC is hereby sustained. 5. In view of the above, it is not necessary for us to go through the or her grounds filed by the assessee. 6. In the result the appeal is dismissed.
-
1986 (12) TMI 95 - ITAT INDORE
... ...
... ... ..... O has stated in this case is that further action for clubbing this income in the individual case of Shri Jhamaklal would be taken separately. It is there that the assessee would have a cause for grievance against his assessment, but that case is not before me, nor was that party before the ITO or the AAC and, therefore, any order passed in these proceedings would neither be binding upon that party nor can it be used for the benefit of that party. The earlier order of the Tribunal does not take into consideration this aspect of the matter at all. I, therefore, am of the opinion that at this stage there is nothing for me to interfere with the order of the AAC. However, after the assessment in the hands of Shri Jhamaklal in his individual capacity is finalised and the income in question is either added or deleted from his hands, the assessee would be at liberty to move for a proper order in this case. Subject to this observation, the present appeal fails and is hereby dismissed.
-
1986 (12) TMI 94 - ITAT INDORE
... ...
... ... ..... d not have any substance. 12. Upon and over consideration of the entire language used in the two IT Acts and the relevant authorities on the subject, I am of the opinion that the word employer used in s. 15 of the IT Act has no particular significance in the sense that if it is not possible to find out as to who is the employer of a particular assessee, his income would not be liable to tax under the heads Salaries , when it is clearly a salary otherwise. What I mean to say is that the use of the word employer by the legislature in this connection may be inadvertent and to tax such salaries as could be ascribed to a particular employer because the intention was to tax every kind of income as s. 14 would show and therefore, there was no intention to exclude such salaries, which a person received from any body, who could not be strictly called to be employer of the recipient. 13. Consequently, I am of the opinion that there is no force in this appeal, which is hereby dismissed.
-
1986 (12) TMI 92 - ITAT HYDERABAD-B
Assessment Order, Orders Passed, Orders Prejudicial To Interests ... ... ... ... ..... pported by the cheque leaves which shows the endorsement on the reverse by Shri Ganesh who is a partner of the firm. The cumulative effect of these evidences taken together make us believe that the department has a case that these two concerns are benami concerns. 31. However, it is not necessary for us to give a final finding whether they are benami concerns. The Commissioner in his order in paragraph 24 had only set aside the assessment with a direction to the ITO to redo the same afresh after giving full opportunity of hearing to all the parties concerned. The assessee is also at liberty to adduce any other evidence at the time of assessment. Under these circumstances, we do not see how the order of the Commissioner on merits could be said to be unreasonable. 32. Although, we have given a finding in favour of the department on the merits of the case, since we have held that the Commissioner has no jurisdiction to revise the order under section 263, the appeals are allowed.
-
1986 (12) TMI 91 - ITAT HYDERABAD-A
Acquisition Of Immovable Property, Proceedings For ... ... ... ... ..... t be reasonable in respect of a business turnover. Even in ordinary building which is let out, capitalisation at 8 would lead to very unrealistic figure. We are therefore unable to find the rate of capitalisation adopted to be reasonable. 14. Thus, there are three glaring infirmities in the valuation given by the competent authority. Firstly, when the ground floor is valued at Rs. 1 lakh, the fist floor cannot be valued at Rs. 9.5 lakhs. Secondly, the receipts from the lodging business run on the first floor is not an indicator of the value of the building by itself. The receipts are the result of several other facts and these other factors should not be ignored. Thirdly, the rate of capitalisation is unrealistic. When these three factors are considered along with the valuation given by two experts, we find that the value fixed by the competent authority cannot be supported at all. 15. For the reasons, we are unable to sustain the acquisition order. The appeal stands allowed.
-
1986 (12) TMI 89 - ITAT HYDERABAD-A
Hindu Succession Act ... ... ... ... ..... o real dispute or Claim the transaction might amount to a transfer. In support of this proposition he cited the following decisions Sashi Kantha Acharjee v. Promode Chandra Roy AIR 1932 Cal. 600, Savitri Devi v. Kamal Singh AIR 1955 Pat. 456 and AIR 1968 Pat. 486 (sic). The learned departmental representative argued that even regarding 1/4th share in the Joint family property the assessee had got absolute rights in view of ss. 6 and 8 of Hindu Succession Act and so even with regard to the joint family property left behind by the deceased there cannot be any bona fide dispute. However, we are of the opinion that there can be a bona fide dispute regarding the quantum of share entitled to by the assessee herein and under the circumstances we already held that the family settlement is valid as far as the joint family properties in the hands of the father of the assessee is concerned. In the result, we fail to see any merit in either of these appeals and hence these are dismissed.
-
1986 (12) TMI 88 - ITAT DELHI-E
... ...
... ... ..... ight of this, we are unable to sustain the order of the CIT(A) setting aside the assessment and directing the ITO to carry out certain investigations on the basis of the auditor s certificate, when the auditor s certificate did not call for any further investigation. It is also to be borne in mind that this sum of Rs. 1,03,253 had not come out of borrowed funds nor was there any such allegation in the order of the ITO either. This addition is therefore, not called for and the CIT(A) should have deleted it. We therefore direct that this addition be deleted. 12. In the last ground, objection is taken to the disallowance of Rs. 10,000 in respect of which the ground raised suggests that this sum was disallowed in the assessment of Ice Machinery Mart and for that reason, should have been allowed as a deduction in computing the assessee s income. This ground was not pressed at the time of hearing by the ld. counsel for the assessee. 13. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part.
-
1986 (12) TMI 87 - ITAT DELHI-E
... ...
... ... ..... regular assessment on a/c of excess payment of advance tax. Respectfully following the aforesaid decision of the Hon ble ITATI, uphold the ITO s action to charge interest u/s 139 (8) of IT Act, 1961. Next contention in this appeal is that ITO erred in charging interest for the month of Dec. 1982 also. It was submitted that the return of income was filed on31st Dec., 1982and as such the month of Dec. 1982 was not a complete month and therefore ITO was not justified in charging interest for the month of December. I do not find any substance in the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant. In view of the judgment of Hon ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. Laxmiratan Cotton Mills reported in 97 ITR page 285 the complete month means a period of 30 days counted from the date of default. In the month of December 1982 there was a delay of 30 days and hence interest u/s 139 (8) of the Act was rightly charged by the ITO. 8. In the result the appeal is dismissed.
-
1986 (12) TMI 86 - ITAT DELHI-E
... ...
... ... ..... arding studded stones being of no value and it is to project this aspect that the relevant portion of his order is reproduced above. At the same time, the contention of Shri N.B. Singh, Sr. Departmental Representative that the addition made in the assessment should be restored is not being accepted because application of rate of 80 per cent in the type of trade being carried on by the assessee is considered as wholly misconceived. After giving our thoughtful moments, we reject the assessee s plea of lifting the addition retained on account of under valuation of closing stock. The revenue however, must succeed in relation to un-accounted for stones studded in purchased ornaments for which we estimate an addition of Rs. 5000 considering the quantum of purchases which were worth only Rs. 64,549 and the opening stocks. 8. The result would be that whereas the assessee fails the Revenue appeal is partly allowed because we are restoring addition of Rs. 5000 in respect of its appeal.
........
|
