|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 101 to 120 of 237 Records
-
1983 (3) TMI 157 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Promissory estoppel inapplicable to exemption notification ... ... ... ... ..... review and restrain the taxes. The judiciary cannot restrain the taxes, however great the hardship may appear to the judicial mind to be per Lord Cairns in Partington v. Attorney-General (1869) LR 4 HL 100 (122). All that it can enquire into is the legislative competence in a federal written constitution. 57. emsp We have, therefore, no hesitation in holding that to the notifications issued under Section 25(1) of the Act the doctrine of promissory estoppel has no application. Nor are we prepared to hold that the withdrawal of exemption is such action as interferes with the petitioner rsquo s right to carry on business or trade. The Government, in our opinion, was competent to withdraw the exemptions once granted, whether the notification granting the exemption was time-bound or not. We have reached the conclusion that the exemption was withdrawn in public interest and the withdrawal notifications are valid. 58. emsp For these reasons these petitions are dismissed with costs.
-
1983 (3) TMI 154 - ITAT PUNE
... ...
... ... ..... the assessee should succeed. 4. Shri Trimal had read certain portion from ITO s order dated 1st February 1973 wherein there is a narration stating that the assessee had withdrawn Rs.10, 000 on two occasions. It is worthy to note that the STO has mentioned in his order his (this assessee s) contentions that whatever his transactions that were shown in the return were correct and the suppressed sales which were noted down in the assessee s diary are not pertaining to him......... contention is not accepted. Therefore, it cannot be said that the assessee was trying to save his skin. On the contrary his version is absolutely right from the beginning, and therefore, it cannot be held by any stretch of imagination that the transaction exceeding Rs. 2 lakhs and odd was that of this assessee. therefore, I uphold the order of the AAC but for reasons other than those of his and hold that the additions made by the ITO had to be deleted. Accordingly the departmental appeal is dismissed.
-
1983 (3) TMI 151 - ITAT PUNE
... ...
... ... ..... assessee that the assessee had approached CIT by filing petition for waiver of penalties and interest and that the order of the CIT was awaited. However, the ITO was of the view that the penalty proceedings may be lured by limitation and hence he levied penalties of Rs. 1,03,140 and Rs. 58,104. 6. Against the order of the ITO the assessee went in appeal before the CIT (A) who held partially in favour of the assessee in that he held that for asst. yr. 1975-76 upto 31st March, 1977 and for asst. yr. 1976-77 upto 30th June, 1977 could be treated as a reasonable period and for the period beyond that till 12th October, 1977 (on which date the returns were filed) he held that the penalty was leviable. Accordingly the CIT (A) allowed the assessee rsquo s appeals partly. 7. Since the departmental representative had placed before us a copy of the CIT rsquo s order who has waived the penalties u/s. 271(1)(a) the appeals of the assessee are redundant and accordingly they are dismissed.
-
1983 (3) TMI 150 - ITAT PUNE
... ...
... ... ..... essment the appeals filed by the assessee are redundant and as such should be dismissed. 3. We have gone through the order of the CIT who passed order u/s. 264 of the Act in the case if this assessee and the CIT has allowed the assessee rsquo s petition with a direction to the ITO at the time of framing fresh assessment I suggest that the ITO should apprise the legal heirs of all the relevant facts on record and gather from them whatever date he can and arrive at reasonable estimate of the incomes of the various years. 4. In view of this direction of the CIT we hold that the appeals are redundant and accordingly they are dismissed.
-
1983 (3) TMI 149 - ITAT PUNE
... ...
... ... ..... asst. yr. 1977-78. We further find that for neither of the two years the assessee has made proper tax payments at proper time as required by law. Considering the assessee rsquo s business and the number of partners who are four, it cannot be stated that the assessee rsquo s business was so small that a part time accountant could write the accounts so as to enable the assessee to make its commitments on filing estimates, returns and make the tax payments on time. We further find that the AAC merely accepted the averments made before him. We have to record that the assessee rsquo s representative failed to substantiate any of the averments made before the AAC. We find that in present case the ITO has disproved the assessee rsquo s explanation. In the circumstances, we hold that the AAC rsquo s order dt. 14th September, 1981 cancelling the two penalties levied by the ITO is erroneous on facts and therefore bad in law. As such we accept the two appeals. 9. Each appeal is allowed.
-
1983 (3) TMI 142 - ITAT PATNA
... ...
... ... ..... the case, neither excessive nor unreasonable having regard to the services rendered by the agency firm. The payment by way of commission having not been doubted, the entire expenditure so claimed was allowable business expenditure. It may be that certain goods had been directly sold by the principal without the agency of M/s Ambica Textile Mills, but that would not mean that the commission on those sales were not payable by the principal to the agent. It is provided in in term No. 3 of the agency agreement that the agent shall get commission of 3 on all sales of the principal. It is further provided in term No. 12 of the agency agreement that the principal cannot sell any goods directly to any one and that if it did so to the commission shall accrue to the agent. In this situation neither the disallowance of Rs. 45,000 nor the disallowance of Rs. 15,000 as made by the ITO can be said to have been validly made. 6. In the result, therefore, the departmental appeal is dismissed.
-
1983 (3) TMI 140 - ITAT MADRAS-D
... ...
... ... ..... rm to the business in question, and will not constitute a change in the constitution of the firm as contemplated by section 187 of the Act. Therefore, even with regard to the firm of V. Muniswamy Mudaliar and Company, the Tribunal was right in holding that no single assessment could be made under section 187 of the Act, and only two assessments could be made for the two periods on the two firms. In the light of the aforesaid decision of the Madras High Court which applies to the facts, we hold that on the death of Shri Lakshmanan, there was dissolution of the firm and there was succession of the firm thereafter and, consequently, two assessments should be made. In this view of the matter, therefore, the Commissioner was not justified in setting aside the assessments made by the ITO giving direction to the ITO to club the income of both the periods. Consequently, we reverse the order of the Commissioner and restore the order of the ITO. 6. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1983 (3) TMI 139 - ITAT MADRAS-D
Concessional Rate, Industrial Company ... ... ... ... ..... and, therefore, the word construction can by no stretch of imagination be attached to or qualify the word goods so as to regard the assessee as falling within the definition of an industrial company . We find no substance in the alternative contention of the assessee that the manufacture of other articles required for the construction of flats would be sufficient to qualify the assessee as an industrial company. A reading of the definition shows that the assessee should be mainly engaged in the manufacture of goods and since the assessee is mainly engaged in the construction of flats, the incidental manufacture of any goods would not qualify it as being mainly engaged in the manufacture of goods. We are, therefore, of the considered opinion that the assessee is not entitled to the concessional rate of tax, treating it as an industrial company. We must, therefore, reverse the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) and restore the assessment made by the ITO. The appeal is allowed.
-
1983 (3) TMI 136 - ITAT MADRAS-B
Charitable Or Religious Trust, High Court, Income Tax Act ... ... ... ... ..... e pointed out in the earlier portion of the order, the Madras High Court found that the reference to religious purpose was not bad for uncertainty and that by itself would not have stood in the way of granting exemption even under the Income-tax Act, but for the fact that the objects also provided that the trust property could be put to other vague purposes like cultural, social and allied purposes, the trust property in this case must be held to be exempt under section 5(1)(i). That is to say, the very High Court judgment which is now sought to be used against the assessee for wealth-tax purposes, in our view, helps the assessee s case. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the trust property is exempt from the levy of wealth-tax under section 5(1)(i). Therefore, we endorse the view taken by the Commissioner (Appeals) insofar as wealth-tax is concerned. 9. in the result, IT Appeal No. 1651 (Mad.) of 1980 is allowed and WT Appeal Nos. 714 and 70 (Mad.) of 1981 are dismissed.
-
1983 (3) TMI 133 - ITAT MADRAS-A
... ...
... ... ..... iable by some common quality of a public or impersonal nature. In the present case, though the basic beneficiaries are the catholic members of the community, this aspect does not militate against the assessee rsquo s claim having regard to the above decision. We may also refer to Gujarat High Court decision in (1973) 88 ITR 354 (Guj) cited supra, which was confirmed by the Supreme Court in CIT vs. Ahmedabad Rana Caste Association (1983) 140 ITR 1 (SC) where it was reiterated that the advancement of any object beneficial to a section of the public as distinguished from an individual or group of individuals would be a charitable purpose. The ratio of the subsequent Supreme Court decision in (1981) 22 CTR (SC) 106 (1981) 130 ITR 28 (SC) (Bar Council of Maharashtra), cited supra, would also support the assessee rsquo s stand. In the light of the foregoing we find no reason to deviate from the finding of the Commissioner(A). In the result the revenue rsquo s appeals are dismissed.
-
1983 (3) TMI 132 - ITAT MADRAS-A
... ...
... ... ..... t effect the taxability. The position here already stated, the appointments of the assessee as a Managing Director was subject to the approval of the Government and can not take effect without same. Therefore when ever before it takes effect by the approval of the government the terms are modified there is no question of accrual because any proposed appointment has not materialised and become and enforceable contract so as to give rise to the rights and liabilities of the parties. The decision on the other hand shows that entries in the accounts are not conclusive but only can Act as a piece of evidence in considering the question. The decision of the Orissa High Court in Trailkyananth Mohanty vs. CIT 1977 CTR (Ori) 310 (1977) 110 ITR 254 (Ori) also in view supports the assessee rsquo s stand in this connection. In this circumstances we delete the additions made in the assessment in respect of Managing Director remuneration and the guarantee commission. The appeal is allowed.
-
1983 (3) TMI 128 - ITAT JAIPUR
... ...
... ... ..... er section18(1)(c), then almost without any exception the penalties would be levied for concealment under section 18(1) (c). It is the duty of the WTO to value an asset belonging to the assessee under section 7 and the assessee cannot be visited with the penalty simply because he failed to disclose that the value of the asset, which might satisfy the WTO when the assessee disclosed the asset with full details identifying and no concealment can be said to have been made under section 18(1)(c) if lesser value of that asset is disclosed by the assessee. So neither under law, nor on the facts, the assessee can be subjected to penalty in this case. 4. Apart from this, Shri Ranka made several legal submissions. As the facts of the case manifestly show that the assessee cannot be visited with penalty Explanation I or ortherwise we do not consider it necessary to go into the other legal arguments advanced by Shri Ranka. For the reasons, we cancel the penalty. . The appeal is allowed.
-
1983 (3) TMI 126 - ITAT JAIPUR
... ...
... ... ..... r. Though he has taken note of the subsequent events for cancelling registration for the asst. yr. 1972-73 but he has failed to take note of the events in the subsequent years and the other assets possessed by the lady which were sufficient security against the debit balance of the year 1973-74 and against loans raised from the HUF. There is no suggestion either in the orders of the authorities below or at the time of hearing of the appeals that the affairs of the firm were so bad that even after taking into consideration the other assets owned by Smt. Rukma Bai, the liabilities of the third parties would not be met. In view of therefore, above discussion, we are of the opinion that the authorities below were not justified in cancelling the registration to the firm u/s 186 (1) for all the assessment years under appeal. We, therefore, cancel the orders of therefore, authorities below for all the assessment years under appeal. 9. In the result, all the five appeals are allowed.
-
1983 (3) TMI 125 - ITAT JAIPUR
... ...
... ... ..... trade and the same were contributed by the assessee in the instant year in the firm towards his capital. On these facts it is amply clear that the assessee was in possession of the stock in trade in the from of the precious stones and that he had made the disclosure and the same and out of the stock so disclosed he made the contribution of some of the stock in trade in the instant year. Thus, the case of the assessee clearly comes within the exception provided by s. 2(14)(i) and no capital gain arises in the assessee rsquo s case. 2. The assessee had fully explained why capital contribution exceeded the income for which the disclosure was made by the assessee. The stock disclosed by the assessee was valued at market rate at the time of contribution and, therefore, the amount by which the capital account was contributed was more than the book value of stock. Therefore, the ITO was not justified in making the addition from other sources. 3. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1983 (3) TMI 124 - ITAT JAIPUR
... ...
... ... ..... no agreement in the original deed how the losses will be shared by the minors on attaining majority. So, on the facts of the case, firstly, there is no change about sharing the losses and even if it is assumed to be so still there will be no change in the constitution in the light of the ratio of the Bombay High Court. The mere fact that the assessee filed Form No. 11A and the new deed dt. 27th February, 1974, will not alter the legal position. The fact remains that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, there was no change in the constitution of the firm and the assessee was not required to file any Form No. 11A and the new deed to obtain the registration, but the assessee is entitled to continuation of registration u/s 184(7) of the facts of the case. The registration having been granted for the earlier years, we approve the order of the AAC that the assessee is entitled to continuation of registration u/s 184(7). 4. In the result, all the appeals are dismissed.
-
1983 (3) TMI 123 - ITAT JAIPUR
Penalty For Concealment, Set On, Time Limit For Completion ... ... ... ... ..... nue. In the case before us, the assessee failed to produce certain materials required by the ITO and therefore the ITO proceeded to make the assessment ex parte and estimate was resorted to. The assessee has not committed any fraud nor can it be said that it has committed gross or wilful neglect in filing the return. All that happened was that he was not able to substantiate its return. Thus, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the burden that lay on the assessee is deemed to have been discharged. There was nothing else for the assessee to do in order to get over the Explanation. Thus, in our opinion the Explanation also cannot be invoked. Accordingly, we are of the view that the extended period of limitation provided under section 153(1)(b) also has no application. 20. In the result, the assessment made on 24-7-1974 is beyond the period prescribed and consequently it is invalid and the same is annulled. 21. In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed.
-
1983 (3) TMI 122 - ITAT INDORE
... ...
... ... ..... ,354 there would hardly be difference of income of Rs. 646. Such expenditure was also duly recorded in the books maintained in the ordinary course of the business. According to the assessee, such expenses are allowable as revenue expenditure. It is different matter that such expenditure were not allowed by the department. 15. If all the aforesaid facts and the explanation of the assessee are taken into consideration in their entirety, it would be clear that there were preponderance of probabilities which would go to show that the mistake in drawing closing balance was unintentional and bona fide. Such mistakes are not unnatural. No evidence worth the name was brought on record by the revenue that it was deliberate or intentional. Thus, for the reasons discussed above, the impugned order of penalty could hardly be accepted. 16. Thus, the impugned order of penalty is cancelled. 17. In the result, ITA No. 1183/Ind/82 is allowed in part and ITA No. 1184/Ind/82 is allowed in full.
-
1983 (3) TMI 121 - ITAT HYDERABAD-B
Bonus Shares, Capital Gains On Sale, Right Shares ... ... ... ... ..... o the shareholder. Such uniformity is assured by averaging the entire outlay by the taxpayer subject only to adjustment for any contribution towards right shares remaining unpaid on date of sale. The decision which we have taken allows for partial relief to the assessee. We have not worked out the actual profit assessable because the assessee had been acquiring shares from time to time, has received bonus shares thrice and also got right shares on which a part of the contribution remains on date of sale. The principle of averaging in respect of partly paid right shares for ascertaining the cost has been illustrated in K. A. Patch s case. It is in the light of this principle that the cost has to be ascertained. We consider it expedient to remit the matter back to the ITO to work out the cost and ascertain the profits on the basis of the principles for ascertaining the cost of acquisition of right shares stated in this paragraph. 6. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part.
-
1983 (3) TMI 120 - ITAT HYDERABAD-A
Question Of Law, Reference Application ... ... ... ... ..... reduce his properties and to increase the property of his minor daughters. We, therefore, agree with the Tribunal that the legal effect of the gifts is that they are void. The observations of the Supreme Court to which we have referred are authority for the proposition that the interest which passed under the document of 2-4-1955 was also voidable at the instance of the enciente son after his birth. Nevertheless, the gift would still be void as against all persons other than the enciente son, and this would include the revenue. If a gift is void against the revenue under the general law, then obviously no gift-tax can be levied. Therefore, since no interest passed to Smt. Chandavathi under the document of 2-4-1955, she could not have conveyed any interest under the document of 31-5-1970. Hence, we would hold that no gift could be brought to tax under the document of 31-5-1970. The cancellation of gift-tax levied is accordingly, upheld. The appeal of the revenue is dismissed.
-
1983 (3) TMI 119 - ITAT HYDERABAD-A
In Part, Two Partners ... ... ... ... ..... esent case, there was such a claim pending by the HUF for the assessment year 1979-80 and in appeal the AAC, by order dated 28-7-1982, had restored the matter for further examination by the ITO following an order of a Single Member of this Tribunal in IT Appeal No. 776 (Hyd.) of 1981 dated 19-5-1982 which was to the effect that the amendment in section 171(9) would not affect assessments for the year 1979-80. The learned departmental representative sought to contest this view, and he submitted that the provisions of section 171(9) applied to all partitions which took place subsequent to 31-12-1978. In the view that we have taken that registration has to be allowed even assuming that the provisions of section 171(9) applied, we leave the issue as to whether the amendment would apply to the assessment year 1979-80 open in the present case. 8. The result is, IT Appeal No. 837 (Hyd.) of 1982 is dismissed. 9 to 12. These paras are not reproduced here as they involve minor issues.
............
|
