|
Advanced Search Options
Income Tax - Case Laws
Showing 1 to 20 of 122 Records
-
1986 (9) TMI 425
... ...
... ... ..... f Section 17 is a profit in lieu of salary, his income is assessed at a higher rate than that it would otherwise have been assessed, the Income-tax Officer shall on an application made to him in this behalf grant such relief as may be prescribed. The prescribed relief is set out in Rule 21-A of the Income-tax Rules. The appellant is entitled to relief under Section 89 because compensation herein awarded includes salary which has been in arrears as also the compensation in lieu of reinstatement and the relief should be given as provided by Section 89 of the Income-tax Act read with Rule 21-A of the Income-tax Rules. The appellant is indisputably entitled to the same. If any application is required to be made, the appellant may submit the same to the competent authority and the Corporation shall, through its Tax Consultant, assist the appellant for obtaining the relief. 10. The appeal is allowed. The order of the High Court is set aside. Order in the aforesaid terms is passed.
-
1986 (9) TMI 422
... ...
... ... ..... of ₹ 1,00,000 was not liable to be included in the income of the assessee. That decision is Sukhdeo Charity Estate, Ladnu v. CIT, Rajasthan, Jaipur. There is no dispute that as a result of exclusion of this amount of ₹ 1,00,000 from the income of the assessee, the very foundation for imposition of penalty under sections 271(1)(c) has become non-existent. This is an undisputed position before us. It is therefore, clear that in this situation it is now unnecessary to answer the above question of law which has been referred for the decision of this Court. The reference is disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs.
-
1986 (9) TMI 413
... ...
... ... ..... not been contravened in any manner. 7. In regard to the third question, the Tribunal was not right in holding that the order of the Commissioner was based on surmises and conjectures. No enquiry had been held and, therefore, no concluded finding could be arrived at by the Commissioner and, therefore, there was no question of surmises and conjectures. 8. In regard to the fourth question, in our view, the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Smt. Rambha Devi ( supra) was not correct. The Tribunal was not right in holding that the Commissioner could not set aside the assessment in pursuance of the scheme. 9. In respect of the last question, we are of the view that the Tribunal was not right in cancelling the consolidated order of the Commissioner passed under section 263(1). 10. For the reasons stated above, all the questions are answered in favour of the revenue and against the assessee. However, in the special circumstances of the case, there will be no order as to costs.
-
1986 (9) TMI 386
... ...
... ... ..... lause (iii) of clause (44) of section 2, to the tax Recovery Commissioner, and the appeal is to be presented within thirty days from the date of the order appealed against. Under sub-rule (3) of rule 86, pending the decision of any appeal, the appellate authority has power to stay the execution of the certificate. Thus, an appeal lies and is pending where all the questions have been agitated. The appeal is an efficacious remedy. The sale has been confirmed under rule 63 of the principal Rules. I am, therefore, of the opinion that because an appeal has been filed and is pending and it is an efficacious remedy under the Act, it will not be proper to exercise the extraordinary jurisdiction of this court under article 226 of the Constitution on the facts and circumstances of the present case. Consequently, on the ground of availability of the alternative efficacious remedy under the Income-tax Act and the principal rules, the writ petition is dismissed with no order as to costs.
-
1986 (9) TMI 385
Whether the incomes arising from the Reserve Fund and the Expenses Account of the Nizam's Family Trust Deed, can be aggregated in single assessment - HC was right in holding that the settlor intended to create separate trusts in respect of the Reserve Fund and the Family Trust Expenses Account & that the respective incomes arising from the corpus of those trusts cannot be aggregated in one single assessment but must be assessed separately - question is answered in favour of the assessee
-
1986 (9) TMI 316
Customs Adjudication ... ... ... ... ..... le of criminal jurisprudence which also applies to the Departmental proceedings that at least there must be some sort of evidence from the side of the Department to show that the appellant had contravened any provisions of the Customs Act and it is only when such evidence is forthcoming that the appellant is supposed to rebut that evidence. In the instant case, the Department have miserably failed to prove the alleged recovery. The opinion of the Adjudicating Authority that it also cannot be believed that the police would be in a position to plant so much silver and opium is also against the experience of life. In the case in hand the probability that the person concerned might have escaped at the time of his apprehension cannot be ruled out and the further probability that the police might have seized the silver as an abandoned property also cannot be ruled out. 5. emsp In the result, we allow the appeal and set aside the impugned order so far as it relates to the appellant.
-
1986 (9) TMI 251
Confiscation of goods ... ... ... ... ..... en made to a case where after seizure and issue of show cause notice, the proceedings had been dropped. A copy of Order No. 16/84, dated 14-2-1985 by the Deputy Collector of Customs, Bangalore, in the case of M/s. Malhotra Radio Corporation, Bangalore, has been given to me. Even to cast the burden under Section 123 of the Act on the appellant, the initial threshold has to be crossed that the goods are of foreign origin. However, in view of the totality of the circumstances in this case, namely that the appellant had been claiming the goods to be of Indian origin, and the expert opinion on examination of the goods had not categorically endorsed the Department rsquo s case that they were of foreign origin, and the rejection of the expert opinion by the lower authority is also not based on sound reasoning, it is considered that this will be a fit case for extending the benefit of doubt to the appellant. The appeal is therefore, allowed with consequential relief to the appellant.
-
1986 (9) TMI 209
CLASSIFICATION ... ... ... ... ..... dura Coats Ltd. is regarding the continuance of the benefit of an exemption Notification issued under an old Tariff Entry even after the product enjoying the benefit thereof becomes classifiable under a new Tariff Entry as a result of an amendment of the Tariff/ Finance Act, until the Notification is specifically withdrawn or superseded by another Notification. In the view that we are taking, it is not held that the impugned goods were correctly classifiable under Item 22-A of the Central Excise Tariff prior to 1.3.75 or covered by exemption Notification No. 53/65. Therefore, the question of this exemption continuing after the amendment of the Tariff with effect from 1.3.75 does not arise. 16. emsp Respectfully concurring with the decision of this Bench in the case of Sri Ram Jute Mills Ltd., Calcutta v. Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta (supra), we hold that the impugned products are correctly classifiable under Item 68 of the Central Excise Tariff. 17. Appeal dismissed.
-
1986 (9) TMI 154
Hindu Succession Act, 1956 ... ... ... ... ..... afresh after providing the assessee and the department an opportunity of being heard. 11. In the cross-objection filed by the assessee in respect of the wealth-tax appeals for the assessment year 1978-79 it is contended that while determining the value of the house property at 16 times the rental income, a deduction was required to be given for the municipal taxes, etc., for the purposes of arriving at the net rental income. It is stated that the value determined without providing for such deductions is highly excessive. We find that this matter has not been considered by the AAC. Hence we do not entertain this ground as it does not arise out of the order of the AAC. 12. In the end, the income-tax appeals filed by the department for the assessment years 1980-81 and 1981-82 are dismissed. The wealth-tax appeals filed by the department for the assessment years 1978-79 to 1981-82 are only partly allowed, for statistical purposes. The cross objection of the assessee is dismissed.
-
1986 (9) TMI 146
From Other Sources, High Court, Interest Income ... ... ... ... ..... perty income and the expenditure claimed was in respect of such property income and hence inapplicable to the facts of the present case. The three decisions relied on by the learned departmental representative are not applicable to the facts of the present case as they do not relate to a case of a company which is in liquidation and that the income is earned in the course of liquidation proceedings by the Official Liquidator and expenses are claimed by him against such income. The Special Bench decision of the Tribunal in ITO v. Smt. Vijayalaxmi N. Mafatlal 1985 SOT 581 (Bom.) is in favour of the assessee. We, therefore, respectfully follow the decision of the Bombay High Court in H. H. Maharani Shri Vijaykuverba Saheb of Morvi s case and the decisions of the Tribunal in the case of Gannon Dunkerley and Co. Ltd. and the Special Bench decision referred to above and confirm the orders of the Commissioner (Appeals) in all these years. 8. In the result, the appeals are dismissed.
-
1986 (9) TMI 144
... ...
... ... ..... hat registration be granted to it. Appeal No. 147 is, therefore, allowed. In consequence thereof, the Department Appeal No. 162 also stands allowed as the protective assessment made by the ITO would not be treated to be a substantive one. 7. Coming to the cross objection No. 36, the position is somewhat doubtful. No actual business was carried on by the assessee because the business of selling country made foreign liquor was actually carried on by M/s English Wine Traders Unit No. 1, Jaipur. It may, however, be that the assessee may have incurred some expenses to keep its office running or the execution of the Partnership Deed or to keep its accounts. Such expenses would be nominal and may be allowable. Since the ITO has not discussed the matter from this angle, the assessee s cross objection is allowed for statistical purposes and the matter is restored back to the file of the ITO to determine the income of the assessee firm afresh in the light of our aforesaid observations.
-
1986 (9) TMI 143
... ...
... ... ..... other case of Punjab and Haryana High Court, CIT vs. Daljit Singh (1980) 15 CTR (P and H) 260 (1981) 131 ITR 719, (P and H) the issue was one of cross-gifts, which were on facts found to be not emerging out from the material on record. We are therefore, of the view that to say that no gift was, in fact, made would not be improper on the facts of the case as there is no denial to the fact that the monies, flowed from the donors to the donees. In fact, it would be held that the gifts were made by the various persons to their respective spouses and their sons. The holding of the gifts to be valid does not necessarily mean that the clubbing provisions under s. 64 would not be operative as the circumstances clearly indicate that it is, in fact, the gift by the husband to the wife but through his brother as held by Bombay High Court in the Patel case. 5. In the result, we accept the gifts as valid gifts, subject to the observations made above and allow the appeals of the assessee.
-
1986 (9) TMI 140
Estate Duty, Insurance Policies ... ... ... ... ..... d therefrom. 7.1 Apart from the Supreme Court s ruling the Board s own circulars which have been reproduced earlier go to establish that the intention of the Legislature was not to include such amounts received on account of accident policies as part of the estate of the deceased. Their clarification is further to the effect that the amount received by the legal heirs is from the corporation and not from the deceased s employers and, therefore, is outside the ambit of income-tax as well. Even on this count, the action of the lower authorities in including the said amounts as part of the estate is bad and improper. 7.2 The main issue, which is settled by the Board s circular and also by the Supreme Court s ruling the answering of the alternative contention that it should be treated as a separate estate which is not necessary as even this is leased on the earlier rulings also stands negatived by the Supreme Court in the abovesaid ruling. 8. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1986 (9) TMI 139
Undisclosed Income ... ... ... ... ..... nd by Shri Chandanmal Dugar, ownership of certain assets by Smt. Ratan Devi Dugar and sustaining of addition of Rs. 8,902. Besides that the Commissioner (Appeals) order maintaining levy of interest under sections 215 and 217 has also been challenged. As we have pointed out above, we are not deleting any additions made by the ITO on the ground that we disbelieve the case of the department. We are sending the matter to the Commissioner (Appeals) on the ground that the whole thing is suspicious and it would be unsafe for us to give any fresh finding other than what the Commissioner (Appeals) has done in his well considered judgment. Accordingly, we are not inclined to interfere with the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) at the instance of the assessee but direct him to decide the issues afresh in the light of our aforesaid discussion. 11. In the result, C. O. No. 2 (Jp.) of 1985 is dismissed while IT Appeal Nos. 1192 and 1193 (Jp.) of 1984 are allowed for statistical purposes.
-
1986 (9) TMI 138
... ...
... ... ..... party to them. Hence these circumstances compelled the assessee to pay cash for supplies received from the parties. In those circumstances s. 40A(3) disallowance cannot be sustained. The ld. Departmental representative relied upon the Punjab and Haryana High Court s decision which is already cited above and had held as the supply of goods were made long back there is no justification to the assessee to make cash payment long after it supplied goods to the parties. After hearing both sides we are in climed to agree with the ld. Advocate, Shri M.J. Swamy, for the assessee and held that in view of his contentions not having been controverted they should be taken to be true, and therefore, in our opinion, there are no valid reasons for disallowance of the cash payment made to these parties, especially when the identity as well as the payments made were clearly established. 9. In the result, the appeal is fully allowed and the orders of the lower authorities are hereby set aside.
-
1986 (9) TMI 137
... ...
... ... ..... trading receipts of such a merchant. However, it is quite unnecessary to go into the question at all and we are just content by saying that under the facts and in the circumstances of the case, there was no justification for the lower authorities to disallow the provisions as deductions from out of the gross total income of the assessee while determining the taxable income for asst. yr. 1984-85. 4. In the result, we set aside the orders of the lower authorities and we hold that the above amounts namely the amounts debited in the profit and loss A/c towards the probable sales-tax liability of cash of the assessees, the provision for the market fee payable by each of these assessees under the market Act, 1966 and the provision for central sales-tax debited to the P and L A/c should all be allowed as legitimate deduction from out of gross total income before finalising the assessments against these three assessees for asst. yr. 1984-85. 5. In the result, the appeals are allowed.
-
1986 (9) TMI 136
Previous Year ... ... ... ... ..... king up of accounts. In the case before us the accounts were made up to 31-12-1980 and the profit and loss account was also drawn up to that date. A reading of the said decision does not show as to how it invalidates any of the contentions raised on behalf of the assessee in this appeal. 10 The last of the decisions relied upon by the learned departmental representative was Karnal Kaithal Co-operative Transport Society Ltd. v. CIT 1972 84 ITR 46 (Punj and Har.), After going through the said decision we are convinced that it is in no way relevant to any of the issues which arise in the present appeal. Therefore, we set aside the orders of the lower authorities and hold that separate assessments should be made against the assessee in the capacity of unregistered firm for the assessment year 1981-82 taking the previous year from 27-7-1980 to 31-12-80 and for the assessment year 1982-83 taking the previous year from 1-1-1981 to 31-3-1981. 11. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1986 (9) TMI 134
Export Market Development Allowance ... ... ... ... ..... nd loss account prepared for the branch office at Bagdad 94,155 dinar were incurred for advertisements. We cannot contemplate to any other advertisement than offering the labour supply by the Bagdad branch office of the assessee. Therefore, the presumption of the ITO there is no evidence that the branch did not publicise about goods and services available with the assessee at Bagdad falls to the ground. We also hold that the assessee is not entitled to weighted deduction over labour wages, travelling expenses from India to Bagdad for conveying labour, the amenities and other things provided to labour in view of the Special Bench decision in J.H. and Co. s case as well as the Third Member decision in Ramji Dayawalla and Sons case. We have already stated in prior paragraphs the expenses incurred for maintaining branch office at Bagdad and we agree that all those expenses are entitled to weighted deduction under section 35B(1)(b)(iv). In the result, the appeal is partly allowed.
-
1986 (9) TMI 133
Rectification Of Mistakes, Apparent From Record, Business Disallowance, Salary Paid To Partners
-
1986 (9) TMI 131
Gift Tax, Quoted Equity Shares, Unquoted Shares ... ... ... ... ..... the shares for purposes of gift-tax have to be valued on the basis of yield method and we reject the contention of the revenue in this behalf. 13. Though no specific ground of appeal was taken before us as regards valuation, the assessee had argued for yield method in his capacity as respondent in the departmental appeal. As the AAC s order is not in consonance with the pronouncement of the Supreme Court in the case cited supra, we have to interfere with his order even though no specific ground was raised by the assessee in his appeal before us. Therefore, we set aside the direction of the AAC to take the mean of the two values and restore the case to the file of the GTO with the direction that he will adopt yield basis for valuing the shares for purposes of gift-tax after affording a reasonable opportunity to the assessee to state his submissions. 14. In the result, the assessee s appeal is dismissed and the departmental appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.
........
|
