|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 141 to 160 of 232 Records
-
1986 (4) TMI 93 - ITAT BOMBAY-D
Agricultural Development Allowance ... ... ... ... ..... n any manual art or industry, usually held in and operated directly by the hand but including also certain simple machines, as the lathe . Similarly, implement is a tool or instrument . Further, the distillation plant is not made available for use by the cultivators and the distillation plant is used only by the assessee-company and no cultivator is allowed to come near it. Under these circumstances, we hold that the assessee is not entitled to weighted deduction on distillation services expenses of Rs. 2,45,324. 23. Scientific farms expenses of Rs. 1,25,033 are also not entitled to weighted deduction because the said expenses are not on dissemination of information or on demonstration of modern techniques or methods of agriculture farm runs into 200 acres and is not a small piece of land used for demonstration. 24. In the result, the revenue s appeal for the assessment year 1970-71 is partly allowed. 5 to 33. These paras are not reproduced here as they involve minor issues.
-
1986 (4) TMI 92 - ITAT BOMBAY-D
Chargeable Profits, Computation Of ... ... ... ... ..... . The learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the said condition would give rise to difficulties when some of the partners of the concern are non-resident and some are resident. We are unable to agree with this contention. What would be required to be seen in order to determine whether a particular concern was an Indian concern within the meaning of clause (x) would be whether the ownership, management and the control of a concern was substantially in India. In the present case, admittedly the City Bank is incorporated outside India and it is a non-resident company. Consequently, simply because it has a branch in India that branch cannot be termed to be an Indian concern. We are supported in the view which we have taken by the decision of the Madras High Court in CIT v. Craigmore Land and Produce Co. Ltd. 1977 110 ITR 730. We, therefore, uphold the orders of the authorities below on this point. 5 to 7. These paras are not reproduced here as they involve minor issues.
-
1986 (4) TMI 91 - ITAT BOMBAY-C
Advance Tax, Interest Payable By Government ... ... ... ... ..... ted by the Board in the circular and if this is done all the three payments under consideration here were made on or before the due date of the payment of the advance tax instalments. In these circumstances, there can be no element of doubt that on the basis of the Board s circular itself which was binding on the Income-tax authorities, the assessee was entitled to interest under section 214 on the excess advance tax paid. The non-payment of the interest under section 214 on the excess advance tax was, therefore, a mistake apparent from the record and the Commissioner (Appeals) rightly directed that the assessee-company should have been allowed the interest under section 214 on the excess payment of the advance tax and the assessment should have been modified to rectify this mistake apparent from the record. On this issue, therefore, the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) appears to be justified and is upheld. 7. The appeal filed by the revenue fails and is hereby dismissed.
-
1986 (4) TMI 90 - ITAT BOMBAY-B
... ...
... ... ..... Electric within ninety (90) days after the end of each June and December of each calendar year and within ninety (90) days after the date of expiration or termination of this Agreement. As urge by Sri Roongta, the time of ninety days allowed does not stop the accrual. It only grant time to the other party for making payment although the obligation to pay had arisen. We see no substance in ground No. 3. 14. Lastly, it was urged by Sri Dastur that credit for tax which was deducted at source for the royalty income assessed in this year must be given. In this regard, the CIT (A) has, in para 9 of the impugned order for asst. yr. 1979-80, directed the ITO to allow credit tax deducted at source from royalty income after due verification. A similar direction is also given by the firs appellate authority in the appeal for 1980-81. The prayer of the assessee has been rightly considered by the CIT (A) and we uphold his decision. 15. In the result, the appeals fail. They are dismissed.
-
1986 (4) TMI 89 - ITAT BOMBAY-B
... ...
... ... ..... t Plan, dt. 1st March, 1975 is page 4 of the compilation. The assessee had to provide several things besides filling up and levelling the land to be developed. The FSI cannot be equated with the land. Further, the FSI had to be utilised in some other construction which the assessee, or the firm in which the assessee was a partner, had taken up and, naturally, the flats become more congested. According to Sri Doshi, the distinction between FSI and land is not brought about by ten per cent discount and he suggested that at least 50 per cent must be deducted. Although we are of the view that ten per cent discount is not on the reasonable side, fifty per cent is much too high. The purpose of law would be served if a deduction of 25 per cent is made. We, therefore, fix the FSI value at Rs. 22.50 per sq. ft. at against Rs. 30 per sq. ft. fixed by the authorities below. Ground No. 2 is accordingly answered in favour of the assessee. 10. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part.
-
1986 (4) TMI 88 - ITAT BOMBAY-B
Wakf Trust, Assessment Of Trust ... ... ... ... ..... E. H. Nizam s Family (Remainder Wealth) Trust, at page 597, where it has been held that no part of the corpus of the trust funds could be assessed in the hands of the assesses but the assessment could be made on the assesses only in respect of the beneficial interests of the beneficiaries in the trust funds under sub-sections (1) and (4) of section 21. If some amount remind untouched as it is found not held by the trustees on behalf of the beneficiaries, determinate or indeterminate, the said amount will remain untaxed. It is pertinent to mention that the provisions of section 21 have since been amended to take care of such a situation. However, the amended provision is not applicable for the assessment year 1976-77. Having regard to the above discussion, we hold that the provisions of section 21(1) are applicable in this case and not those of section 21(4). The ITO is accordingly directed to reform the assessment under section 21(1). 7. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1986 (4) TMI 87 - ITAT BOMBAY-A
Expenditure On Scientific Research, Deduction, Rural Development ... ... ... ... ..... ls filed against the original assessment orders. This would disposed of IT Appeal Nos. 1988 and 4619 (Bom.) of 1985. 14. We now come to IT Appeal Nos. 541 and 542 (Bom.) of 1986. As already stated, these appeals are directed against orders of the Commissioner (Appeals) confirming the orders of the ITO reducing deduction under section 80G, to 10 per cent of the gross total income in exercise of power under section 154. We find that there is express statutory provision which restricts the allowance to 10 per cent of gross total income. Consequently, when the ITO in the original assessment orders allowed deductions of 50 per cent of the donation there was a mistake apparent on record. Such mistakes are liable to be rectified in exercise of powers under section 154. The point was not debatable at all and no long drawn reasoning was necessary. We, accordingly, confirm the orders of the ITO rectifying the original assessment orders. 15. In the result, all the appeals are dismissed.
-
1986 (4) TMI 86 - ITAT BOMBAY-A
Revision, Orders Prejudicial To Revenue ... ... ... ... ..... scope of section 263(1). As we have already said, section 263 deals with the powers of the Commissioner in the matter of revising a completed assessment of a party and it is in relation to substantive law. Taking all the facts into consideration, we are of the view that Explanation cannot be retrospective in nature when the amending statute itself says that it is effective from 1-10-1984. Following the decisions of the Tribunal in East Coast Marine Products (P.) Ltd. s case and Madanlal Chaganlal (P.) Ltd. s case, we hold that the Commissioner had no jurisdiction to act under section 263 and the impugned order passed by him is required to be set aside. 6. In view of our conclusion on the point of jurisdiction, it will be sheer academic to consider the other submissions of Shri Trivedi and in the circumstances, we do not with to take them up for consideration. 7. In the result, the appeal is allowed. The impugned order passed by the Commissioner under section 263 is set aside.
-
1986 (4) TMI 85 - ITAT BANGALORE
Asset, Encroachment Of Land, Cultivation ... ... ... ... ..... nt in evicting him he will have no interest in the property and will not be protecting their own lands, the assessee could be charged with wealth-tax on the property which he has encroached. We do not feel called upon to answer this conundrum. In the decision cited by the revenue the existence of a vested right in the assessee was not in dispute unlike the present case and only if such a right exists is there a further question of valuation of the property with necessary discount. The possession of the assessee is at the sufferance of the Government and is not a vested right. In the circumstances, we are of the opinion that the encroached land could not be considered to be an asset at all for the purpose of wealth-tax and, since no vested right in them belonged to the assessee it cannot be added to the net wealth of the assessee. We therefore, direct the WTO to recompute the net wealth after excluding the value of this property. 5. In the result, both the appeals are allowed.
-
1986 (4) TMI 84 - ITAT AMRITSAR
... ...
... ... ..... years under consideration are not there and, therefore, the notice under s. 147(a)/148 are invalid and as such the reassessment proceedings under s. 147(1) in both the assessment years are void ab initio and, therefore, liable to be quashed. The AAC has acted accordingly in both the assessment years and, therefore, we confirm his order as his order is not erroneous at all, much more it is in accordance with law and not at all arbitrary. 15. The third common ground in these appeals is regarding AAC s allowing a reduction of Rs. 74,852 and 64,187, holding that the reassessment proceedings taken in the case are ab initio void. The issue raised in this common ground is consequential to the decision on the common ground No. 2, which we have determined in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. Therefore, consequential effect of it is that ground No. 3 is also liable to be rejected. 16. In the result, the appeals of the Revenue for both the assessment years are dismissed.
-
1986 (4) TMI 83 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-C
... ...
... ... ..... parties as well as the material placed before us and we find considerable force in the submissions made on behalf of the assessee. It appears from the orders of the IT authorities that the lump sum addition is made just for the sake of making certain addition to the trading results. The CIT(A) has not mentioned specific items of majuri payments, which according to him are not verifiable from the accounts of the assessee. However, he sustained the addition on the basis of a small fall in the rate of G.P. on majuri receipts, which according to us, was not a correct approach adopted by the CIT(A). It is an undisputed fact that the assessee has maintained its books of accounts for the year under appeal in the same way as were maintained by him in the earlier years. Therefore, we do not find any justification to retain the addition of Rs. 10,000 sustained by the CIT(A). The same is, therefore, deleted from the total income of the assessee. 7. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1986 (4) TMI 82 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-B
Deemed Gift, Valuation Of Gift ... ... ... ... ..... away from the assessee s land which has been sold or that the date of the sale is not proximate. Even then the estimate has not been made at Rs. 250 but at the much lower figure of Rs. 180 which the Commissioner (Appeals) has scaled down Rs. 160 for the assessment year 1972-73 and Rs. 190 for the assessment year 1973-74. In our view the fact that the acquisition proceedings had been dropped is not relevant. There may be various considerations in any case we are.concerned with the gift-tax assessment which is a separate matter. Similarly, the fact that the Commissioner (Appeals) order in wealth-tax taking the value of the land at Rs. 100 has been accepted is also not relevant. The department may not have gone in appeal from that order but that does not mean that for all the purposes and all the statutes it is binding by that decision. Therefore, in our view, the value taken by the Commissioner (Appeals) is reasonable. Accordingly, we confirm his order and reject these appeals.
-
1986 (4) TMI 81 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-A
... ...
... ... ..... fore, considering the provisions contained in s. 185 the assessee is entitled to reasonable opportunity to rectify defect if any so as to bring on record declaration signed by the concerned partners. 6.3. In the case of Delhi Colonisers (case) the Delhi High Court was concerned with defect in signing the application for registration not having been removed even after having been pointed out by the ITO and therefore, this case would not be applicable to the facts of the case. Again the decision in the case of Jagannath Pyarelal the same was delivered in connection with s. 26A of the IT Act, 1922 and law with regard to registration and continuation there of under the 1961 Act is not same. Besides the said decision was concerned with partnership deed as well as application for registration not having been signed by the partner who went aboard. 6.4. We therefore, cancel the order passed under s. 263 and restore the order passed by the ITO. 7. In the result the appeal is allowed.
-
1986 (4) TMI 80 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-A
... ...
... ... ..... ive because the Tribunal has given a clear finding regarding amounts received by the company by way of application for issue of fresh capital which was directly related to the amount lying in the Head Office account in the books of new unit. 5.3. Question No. 4 also does not arise out of the order of the Tribunal because as rightly stated by the ld. departmental representative the year in which the loss was allowable was a question of law point but question as framed before us is with regard to allowability of the loss under s. 28 itself and the question of year is not at all raised in the question as framed. Even during the course of submissions as made out in para 15 of the order it was an agreed position that assessee was entitled to loss but what was required was to fix the year in which the loss was allowable. For this aspect the Tribunal has considered the various evidence led before it and came to the correct conclusion. 6. In the result, the application is dismissed.
-
1986 (4) TMI 79 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-A
... ...
... ... ..... s. 145 of the IT Act regarding method of accounting applicable to income chargeable under the head profits and gains of business as also income from other sources . In this case the regular method of accounting employed by the assessee has been accepted by the Revenue. Of course this would be subject to necessary adjustments regarding prohibited expenditure requiring to be disallowed etc. But here the Revenue wants to disallow the interest expenditure merely on the ground that the interest expenditure cannot be linked with any receipt of interest during the year and because of the fact that the assessee had incurred loss of Rs. 8 lakhs on sale of shares. In our opinion, this approach is not warranted by law. The assessee has discharged the necessary nexus, if at all, required. 6.3. we therefore, set aside the order passed by the Commissioner (A) and direct the ITO to allow the interest paid to various trusts and modify the assessment. 7. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1986 (4) TMI 78 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-A
... ...
... ... ..... hat the amount would have gone out of he partner s accounts. Therefore, the assessee has done in one step that would have been done in two steps. The purpose of the section is that the reserve so created should go out of the profits of the firm. This has been achieved by debiting the partner s accounts. Therefore we hold that the assessee has fulfilled the condition is under s. 32A(4) and so it is entitled to the investment allowance. 5. The second ground is that the CIT(A) erred in retaining the disallowance out of travelling expenses at Rs. 1,000 Officer expenses at Rs. 500 and Karigar tea etc. at Rs. 500. At the time of hearing before us the assessee s Advocate pointed out that all these expenses have been fully vouched and the ld. Departmental Representative could not contest this position. We hold that the disallowance retained by the CIT(A) should not be retained. We cancel those disallowances. On this pint the appeal is allowed. 6. In the result the appeal is allowed.
-
1986 (4) TMI 77 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI-LB
Review Show Cause Notice
... ... ... ... ..... ibunal on the question of limitation. So, while commending the erudition and the elaborate arguments adduced by both the sides on this aspect, we consider that the question does not arise for consideration in the reference and has become merely academic because as has been noted in the preceding discussion, the Hon ble High Court of Delhi is not the only High Court propounding this view, which we are respectfully adopting, and also deciding on first principles, but in Division Bench of the High Court of Bombay in the case, M/s. Corn Products Co. (India) Ltd. v. Union of India, 1984 (16) E.L.T. 177 (Bom.) as well as the High Court of Allahabad, also a Division Bench regarding the case of Triveni Glass Sheet (supra), have recorded similar findings. We thus refrain from expressing any view on this, which otherwise also, as already noted, not a subject matter of reference to us. 41. The present reference is answered in terms of the conclusion reached in the foregoing Para No. 39.
-
1986 (4) TMI 76 - SUPREME COURT
Valuation (Central Excise) ... ... ... ... ..... therefore be assessed to excise duty on the basis of the value of the goods being taken to be the wholesale cash price at which the goods were sold by the wholesale dealers who were the brand name owners and to whom the goods were sold by the appellants. It is only the wholesale cash price at which the goods were sold by the appellants to the wholesale dealers who were brand name owners that was liable to be taken as the value of the goods for the purpose of levy of excise duty. 3. We therefore allow the appeal, set aside the order passed by the Government of India as also the orders passed by the Assistant Collector and the Collector confirming the demand for differential duty from the appellants and quash the demand made against the appellants. If any amount in respect of such differential duty has been recovered by the respondents, such amount shall be refunded to the appellants within six weeks from today. The appeal is disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs.
-
1986 (4) TMI 75 - SUPREME COURT
Valuation - Packing charges ... ... ... ... ..... must hold that Cardboard Cartons were placed in wooden boxes for the purpose of protecting torches and cells against injury or damage during transport and that packing in wooden boxes was not necessary for putting the torches and batteries in the condition in which they are generally sold in the wholesale market at the factory gate. 2. We therefore reach the conclusion that the cost of wooden boxes is not liable to be included in the value for levy of excise duty. We accordingly allow the appeal, set aside the order made by the High Court in the Writ Petition as also the order made by the Appellate Collector and direct the assessing authority to proceed to make assessment in accordance with the view taken in this Judgment and on such assessment being made, the assessing authority will refund to the appellants any excess amount which may be found to have been recovered by the Revenue. This direction will be carried out by the assessing authority within six months from today.
-
1986 (4) TMI 74 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Prosecution - Quantum of sentence - Delay in prosecution - Offence - Transportation of smuggled gold
....
|
