|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 121 to 140 of 266 Records
-
1983 (11) TMI 146 - ITAT HYDERABAD-B
Refund Of Tax ... ... ... ... ..... see submits that in view of such dues further self-assessment tax is not paid, the conduct of the assessee cannot be construed as an attempt to deprive the revenue of any legitimate dues since an equal amount is lying with the revenue. There is also no loss of interest. The assessee-partner and the firm are two different entities and if the assessee does not independently pay the self-assessment tax though refund is due to the firm in which he is a partner, there may be default in the abstract. But such default being clearly a technical one, is venial and looking to the ratio of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Hindustan Steel Ltd., v. State of Orissa 1972 83 ITR 26, it is a default with reference to which penalty need not be imposed merely because there may be power to impose penalty. We, therefore, hold that in the present case no penalty should have been imposed under section 140A(3). The penalty imposed is, accordingly, cancelled and the appeal is allowed.
-
1983 (11) TMI 145 - ITAT HYDERABAD-B
Agricultural Land ... ... ... ... ..... the terms of oral gift. On a scrutiny of the above said evidence tendered by the witnesses to the gift, the Appellate Controller was satisfied that the gift made by the testator was duty accepted by the donees in the manner known to Mohammedan law and, therefore, he came to the conclusion that the gift accompanied by delivery of possession is a valid gift. 13. In view of the foregoing discussions, we are also in entire agreement with the view taken by the Appellate Controller with regard to the oral gift of immovable property made under the Mohammedan law. Accordingly, we hold that the will executed on 1-9-1967 is not a valid will as per Mohammedan law and the oral gift made on 2-4-1970 is a valid gift as contemplated under the Mohammedan law. In that view of the matter, we uphold the order passed by the Appellate Controller in excluding the amount of Rs. 1,85,000 from the estate duty assessment in this case. 14. In the result, the appeal filed by the department is dismissed.
-
1983 (11) TMI 144 - ITAT HYDERABAD-B
Assessee's Appeal, Assessment Order ... ... ... ... ..... ee s behalf. But that does not mean that the ITO was justified in accepting the return under section 143(1) without making any enquiry whatsoever. The learned departmental representative pointed out that the very ITO had forwarded all the prior records to the ITO, Special Investigation Circle-I, even prior to that date. We are, therefore, of the view that there was a case for prima facie enquiry and the apprehension of the Commissioner that the order was prejudicial to the revenue is fully justified in the facts and circumstances of the case once we accept that non-enquiry in a case where enquiry is warranted, would constitute prejudice. This proposition has been accepted by the different High Courts, as pointed out by the learned departmental representative, the last one being that of the Rajasthan High Court in the case of Kanhaiyalal. The order of the Commissioner under section 263 would have had to be upheld even for this reason. 6. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.
-
1983 (11) TMI 143 - ITAT HYDERABAD-A
... ...
... ... ..... d to the assessments of the firm which could be made u/s 182 of the IT Act. We also held that the said section does not invalidate partial partitions under general Hindu law. We specifically held that the provisions of s. 171(9) of IT Act would only invalidate partial partitions for purposes of assessments of HUF rsquo s u/s 143 and 144. Therefore, simply because in the assessments of the joint families of these two partners, these impugned amounts are includible in the income of the respective HUFs of these two partners still as we are dealing with the assessments of the firm but not with the assessment of the HUFs we have to hold that the interest amounts cannot be disallowed by applying the provisions of s. 40(b) of IT Act. We respectfully follow our earlier orders dt. 17th July, 1983 as well as 31st May, 1983 stated above. We, therefore, hold that the disallowance of deduction of Rs. 12,758 is invalid. We set aside the orders of the lower authorities and allow the appeal.
-
1983 (11) TMI 142 - ITAT HYDERABAD-A
Investment Allowance, Motor Vehicles ... ... ... ... ..... filed under section 139. Thereafter, the assessee did not file any revised return but only made the revised claims for grant of higher investment allowance by filing statements. These statements are not equivalent to make a claim in the return. It is a claim de hors the return under section 139. Therefore, the assessee was not shut out from claiming the privilege allowed by the aforesaid Explanation. The assessee sought for permission. According to the ITO, the question of granting permission did not arise. Before the assessment was made, the assessee created a reserve. In these circumstances, we consider that the requirement of the Explanation on the facts of the case stood satisfied. The assessee would therefore, be entitled to the grant of investment allowance in respect of the generator. It would be open to the ITO to check up and verify the correctness of all figures before the grant of investment allowance on this asset. 10. The result is, the appeal is allowed in part.
-
1983 (11) TMI 141 - ITAT HYDERABAD-A
Charitable Purpose, Expenditure Incurred, Income From Business, Income From Property, Religious Trust
-
1983 (11) TMI 140 - ITAT HYDERABAD-A
Any Other Person, Business Expenditure, Travelling Expenses ... ... ... ... ..... r, the alternative contention of the learned departmental representative that the period of user and the rate of depreciation applicable to the property needs further vetting has to be conceded. Hence, the ITO is directed to allow depreciation in accordance with law after giving the assessee an opportunity. 6. The only other ground in this appeal relates to the claim of additional depreciation (Rs. 972) under section 32(1)(iia) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on new machinery cost of Rs. 19,435. Though the statement filed by the assessee included the claim, the ITO overlooked it. The first appellate authority, however, justified the assessment order on this point by saying that prescribed particulars were not furnished. It is not clear from his order as to what further particulars he required. We, therefore, remit this claim also back to the ITO for fresh consideration in accordance with law. 7. The appeal is treated as allowed in the manner indicated in the preceding paragraph.
-
1983 (11) TMI 139 - ITAT DELHI-D
... ...
... ... ..... id debtor on24th May 1976for Rs. 500 bounded. The assessee did take a chance by taking the matter to Delhi Hindustani Mercantile Association but it was a hopeless case as the latter events have shown. 5. Considering the circumstances of the case, we agree with the assessee that no useful purpose would be served by postponing the allowance of bad debt to a subsequent year when the facts were clear in the year under consideration that the debt had become bad. Even if part of the debt is recovered from the said debtor in a subsequent year, the revenue can take action u/s 41(1) and assess the same in the year the money is received. Under these circumstances, we accept the assessee rsquo s contention and hold that the debt of Rs. 10,296 become bad in the year under consideration and should be allowed as such. We, accordingly, allow reduction of Rs. 10,296. 6. Ground regarding disallowance out of general expenses is not pressed and is accordingly rejected. 7. Appeal partly allowed.
-
1983 (11) TMI 138 - ITAT DELHI-B
Any Other Person, Business Expenditure, Travelling Expenses ... ... ... ... ..... ciate as to why on the same set of facts a portion of the commission has been disallowed. We would also like to point out a decision relied on by Shri Mohan Lal. That is the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Maharasthra Sugar Mills Ltd. 1971 82 ITR 452. No doubt there the question was about the payment of managing agency commission. A part of it was sought to be disallowed on the ground that the managing agency also related to sugarcane cultivation, the income from which is not taxable as it is agricultural income. Proportionate commission paid was sought to be disallowed but their Lordships of the Supreme Court held that the entire commission has to be allowed. There is not much of similarity between this case and the case before us but the principle behind the decision can be extended to a case of the present nature before us. We are clearly of the opinion that the commission is allowable. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue succeeds in part.
-
1983 (11) TMI 137 - ITAT DELHI-A
... ...
... ... ..... f hearing before us Shri M.S.Goela, learned departmental representative appeared for the revenue and none for the assessee. After hearing learned departmental representative at length and perusal of the papers on our record, we see no reason to interfere with the order of the AAC. Similar issue came up before the Tribunal in the case of ITO v. Ramesh Chander Saboo and Sons,Gwaliorin Income-tax Appeal No. 3139/Del/81. By its order dated 23rd October, the Tribunal held that since the order of assessment did not incorporate an order for charging of interest under section 139(8) of the Act, the assessee cannot be asked by means of a demand notice to pay the said interest as was done by the ITO in the present case. Respectfully following the above order of the Tribunal with which we agree we hold that the ITO cannot charge interest under the above sections without any specific order passed by him in this regard. 4. In the result, the appeal of the revenue is accordingly dismissed.
-
1983 (11) TMI 136 - ITAT DELHI-A
Appellate Assistant Commissioner, Capital Expenditure, Expenditure On Renovation, Revenue Expenditure
-
1983 (11) TMI 135 - ITAT DELHI-A
Mistake Apparent From Record, Original Assessment ... ... ... ... ..... efined under the Act. Therefore, there is no doubt that the definition under the General Clauses Act would apply. Year means a calendar year according to the British calendar. So far there is no dispute. It is only the day of commencement of the four years period that is disputed. Mr. Unni obviously overlooked section 9 of the General Clauses Act which deals with commencement and termination of time under any Central Act. When the word from a particular day is used, that day is to be excluded. The section is very clear and it admits of no controversy. Therefore, section 154(7) when it mentions that the four years period would commence from the date of the order sought to be amended, the date of the order has to be excluded. If that is so, the last day for passing the impugned order, therefore, would be 31-3-1982 and on that day the order has been passed. Accordingly, we hold that the order has been passed within the prescribed time. 5. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.
-
1983 (11) TMI 134 - ITAT COCHIN
... ...
... ... ..... sale of the super-structure has been ignored on the convenient but unfounded assumption that the cost to the assessee of the super-structure would only be Rs. 66,400. This assumption, as we have pointed out, is not founded on fact. The assessee had not transferred the land separately and the super structure separately. He has transferred the entire property consisting of the land and the super-structure for a consideration of Rs. 1,05,000. As against this consideration, the cost to the assessee should be adjusted in order to arrive at the capital gains. The cost of the land to the assessee being the market value as on 1st Jan, 1964 can be taken at Rs. 14,475 as done by the AAC. The cost of the super- structure has been estimated by us at Rs. 85,000. The total cost of acquisition would, therefore, be Rs. 99,475. The capital gains arising to the assessee would, therefore, be Rs. 5,525. The ITO is directed to modify the assessment on this basis. 6. The appeal is partly allowed.
-
1983 (11) TMI 133 - ITAT COCHIN
... ...
... ... ..... ond Saturday. The next day being the 15th was Sunday. The appeals were filed on Monday, the 16th April, 1979. It may be mentioned that 13th April, 1979 was also a holiday being Good Friday. It is clear that the appeals filed on the earliest working day have to be treated as filed in time in view of s. 11 of the General Clauses Act. The AAC was therefore, in error in dismissing the appeals as out of time. 3. In the result, the orders of the AAC are set aside and the matters are restored to his file for disposal according to law. The appeals shall be treated as allowed for statistical purposes.
-
1983 (11) TMI 132 - ITAT COCHIN
... ...
... ... ..... t to the building or only a portion, and if so, what portion can be treated as land appurtenant to the building. 3. Ground Nos. 3 and 4 These are to the effect that the Commissioner (Appeals) erred in confirming the order of the WTO that the assessee was not eligible for deduction under proviso to section 5(1A) on account of value of National Defence Certificate. For the reasons mentioned by us in our order dated 18-11-1983 in WT Appeal No. 125 (Coch.) of 1982 in the case of the very same assessee for the assessment year 1976-77, these grounds are decided against the assessee. 4. Ground Nos. 5 to 7 These are to the effect that the Commissioner (Appeals) erred in confirming the inclusion of a sum of Rs. 25,000 representing the amount due from General Commercial Agency as a debt includible in the net wealth. This was not pressed by the learned representative for the assessee and has, therefore, to be decided against the assessee. 5. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part.
-
1983 (11) TMI 131 - ITAT COCHIN
A Firm, Cross Gift, High Court, Income Tax, Indirect Transfer, Minor Child ... ... ... ... ..... therefore, find no reason to interfere with the finding of the AAC on this aspect. 11. The cross-objection by one of the assessees questions the validity of the reopening. The form prescribed for filing the return required the assessee to include any income, which is includible in the income of the assessee under section 64. The ruling of the Supreme Court in CIT V. Smt. P.K. Kochammu Amma 1980 125 ITR 624, relied upon by the learned representative of the assessee, is relating to penalty and is based on the return to be filed under the provisions obtaining prior to 1-4-1972 and is not applicable to the present case. The reopening would, therefore, have to be upheld provided the income is actually the income of the assessee under section 64. But, in view of the finding in the appeals, no income has escaped assessment and the reopening cannot, therefore, be upheld. 12. In the result, the appeals by the department are dismissed and the cross objection by the assessee is allowed.
-
1983 (11) TMI 130 - ITAT COCHIN
Accounting Year, Advance Tax, Bona Fide, Business Loss, Carry Forward And Set Off ... ... ... ... ..... of a pre-existing definite obligation would stand out and form a separate category. Distinguishing the earlier decisions of the Madras High Court in the cases of Stanes Motors (South India) Ltd. and Pathinen Grama Arya Vysya Bank Ltd. on the ground that in those cases there were no payments by the assessee-banks it was held that the payment in the particular case was in pursuance of a resolution passed prior to the transfer of the business and was, therefore, in pursuance of a pre-existing obligation. It was for this reason that the claim for deduction was allowed. 8. The ratio of the above decisions seems to be that if the gratuity is paid solely because of the closure of the business, then it would be hit by the ratio of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Gemini Cashew Sales Corpn. In the present case, the payment appears to be solely on account of the closure of the business and the claim is not, therefore, allowable. 9. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1983 (11) TMI 129 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... e owner (the total income for this purpose being computed without including therein any income from such property before making any deduction under Chapter VIA, the excess shall be disregarded. Now, when we come to Chapter VIA which deals with the deductions to be made in computing the total income, it is noticed that deductions in respect of income received in respect of units from the Unit Trust of India, established under the Unit Trust of India Act, 1963, is allowed under s. 80L (1)(v) of the IT Act, 1961. Thus, Unit Trust dividends come within the ambit of Chapter VIA of the Act. In the proviso to s. 23(2), such income is not required to be excluded from the income other than the income from property, 1/10th of which is to be included in the total income of the assessee. Therefore, the arguments of the ld. counsel for the assessee are untenable and are rejected as such. 8. In the result, orders of the authorities below are confirmed. Appeal of the assessee is dismissed.
-
1983 (11) TMI 128 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... the same date can be different under the IT Act and GT Act. Consistency has been termed as an ornament of the Revenue and in respect of the valuation of the very same property on the same date, if different valuations are assigned, it will be very unfortunate. Simply because K. P. Varghese s case, is under the IT Act which is relied upon by the AAC, cannot be ignored as the issue is not only similar but very same too. The contention of the assessee is, therefore, accepted and the deemed gift in the instant case shall be nil. The contention fo the assessee that s. 4(1) (a) could not be invoked though becomes academic in the instant case but so far as invoking of provision of s. 4 (1) (a) is concerned, the same could invoked out as on merit we have arrived at the value of the deemed gift at nil on the basis of reasons given by the AAC in his order in income tax proceedings as above said, it has become only academic. 6. In the result assessee s appeal is allowed as above said.
-
1983 (11) TMI 127 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... r of the Tribunal. 5. The ld. Department al Representative at the time of hearing of this reference application relied on (1978) 113 ITR 791 (All) and submitted that even if an issue is covered by the High Court having jurisdiction it cannot be said final unless it is laid at rest by the Supreme Court. Against that, we have (1980) 14 CTR (SC) 366 (1980) 122 ITR 38 (SC) as per which in case replying to the question is self-evident, it will be only academic to grant reference. Since there is no dispute about the fact that the payment in question was ex gratia, it was made to specified members of the deceased who died in any service air-craft while on duty and there are clear instructions to that effect by the Govt. of India, beside Punjab and Haryana High Court decision. We are therefore of the view that it will be only academic in case this matter is referred under s. 64. The request of the Revenue is, therefore, rejected. 6. In the result, reference application is dismissed.
............
|
