|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 41 to 60 of 1268 Records
-
1977 (12) TMI 65 - ITAT PATNA-B
... ...
... ... ..... urged that the assessee should have looked after her interest in the two firms and there was no necessity to appoint Shri Mehta for the purpose. Accordingly the Departmental Representative urged that the addition should be confirmed. 3.The assessee was a partner in the firms of M/s. Namkum Transport Co. And M/s. Shivchand Joshi and Co. The incomes from these two firms have been included in the total income of the assessee at Rs.7,118 and Rs.14,337. Thus, from the assessment deriving income from these two firms and she appointed Shri Mehta to look after her interest. The assessee was perfectly justified to appoint Shri Dinesh Mehta to look after her interest in the two firms from which she was deriving income. Under the circumstances, after considering the arguments of the assessee and the decision of the Supreme Court in 74 I.T.R. 57, we hold that the assessee was perfectly justified to claim the deduction of Rs. 3,768 which is allowed. 4.In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1977 (12) TMI 62 - ITAT PATNA-A
... ...
... ... ..... n in respect of similar loans. Therefore, if the orders of the Calcutta and the Allahabad bench of the Tribunal are taken into consideration, there is no doubt about the genuiness of the loans standing in the name of Pahljrai Bhagwandas. The AAC has referred that the creditor rsquo s name appeared in the black list of the hundi banker, Even if this is the position, the statement of the hundi banker or the material on the basis of which the creditor rsquo s name was included in the black list must be available to the assessee so that the assessee had opportunity to meet with the objection. No such material or statement had been given to the assessee so that the assessee may challenge the Department rsquo s stand. Under the circumstances merely on this basis the addition could not be confirmed. Therefore, even on this ground the addition is liable to be deleted. We, therefore, delete the additions of Rs. 21,000 and Rs. 5,000 respectively. In the result, the appeals are allowed.
-
1977 (12) TMI 59 - ITAT MADRAS-D
... ...
... ... ..... ation customers at Bombay and Calcutta invariably sent their confirmation letters and statements only after reminders were sent and this cause delay in the finalisation of accounts and filing of its IT return. It is stated that before the statements are received from the consignees at Bombay and Calcutta, the assessee will not be in a position to quantify the expenditure relating to commission sales for purpose of IT assessment. Viewed in this light, there is justification for coming to the conclusion that there is reasonable cause for the assessee rsquo s delay in filing the return. Considering that the duration of delay is very short and also taking into account that the assessee had paid tax as demanded and there was no intention to withhold the tax due to the Government by wantenly delaying the filing of the return, we hold that the AAC was justified in setting aside the penalty imposed on the assessee. 5. In the result, the Departmental appeal fails and stands dismissed.
-
1977 (12) TMI 57 - ITAT MADRAS-A
... ...
... ... ..... a would constitute transfer of a property, parting with the same for a limited period of time would equally constitute a transfer of property. The test would be as laid down by his Lordship Hidayatullha in Abdul Kayoom to see whether it is in the shape of exclusive right to fish the payment not related to chanks or it is a payment for individual unit by unit use for the right. Seen in the light of the above test, we have no hesitation in holding that the assessee-company did part with an asset being viz. the user of a trade mark over an area for a specified period . During this period the assessee-company could not utilise the trade mark in that area and to this extent had been completely deprived of the asset. The specific circumstances obtaining in Ciba rsquo s case also does not obtain here. The decisions cited by the Departmental Representative, therefore, does not help the Revenue. The payment has to be held to be on capital amount and not taxable. The appeal is allowed.
-
1977 (12) TMI 55 - ITAT JAIPUR
... ...
... ... ..... the basis of the afore-mentioned comparable case. The assessee rsquo s own history shows that in the earlier assessments shortages have varied from 1.3 per cent to 1.66 per cent. Considering these facts we fell that the shortage shown were reasonable and the addition of Rs. 15,425 made in the trading accounts was uncalled for. Hence we delete it. 5. We take up now items no 2 and 3 together. The assessee had claimed shop expenses of Rs. 4,735 which included Basa expenses of 2,235. The ITO disallowed the entire amount of Basa expenses and another Rs. 821 on the ground that the shop expenses included inadmissible expenses. Total disallowance made by the ITO thus was Rs. 3,056. With regard to Basa expenses, the AAC allowed relief of Rs. 1,500 and confirmed the balance of Rs. 735. He also confirmed the entire disallowance of Rs. 821. On the facts before us, we feel that these disallowances were justified. Hence we decline to interfere. 6. In the result the appeal succeeds in part.
-
1977 (12) TMI 54 - ITAT HYDERABAD-B
... ...
... ... ..... d that the registration of the vehicle should be transferred in the assessee rsquo s name before depreciation could be claimed. As we had stated earlier, in the case before us, there is no dispute about the fact that the lorry was, in fact used by the assessee during the year of account at least for two days for the purpose of business carried on by him. Even if the transfer of registration of the vehicle might have taken place in the subsequent year, we are of the view that the depreciation due to the assessee on the said vehicles in accordance with the provisions of law can not be denied to him on this ground. In the circumstances, we hold that the assessee would be entitled for depreciation on lorry No. APA 4923 as the same was used at least for two days during the accounting year, i.e., on 30th and 31st Marcy, 1974 for the purpose of business carried on by the assessee. The ITO is directed to allow depreciation on the said vehicle. 6. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1977 (12) TMI 53 - ITAT HYDERABAD-A
... ...
... ... ..... rfecting or completing the assessee rsquo s title to the shares and hence was a capital expenditure forming part of the actual cost of the asset of the assessee. The same position obtain in the case before us. As we have observed earlier, the assessees rsquo title to the lands was not perfect so long as the protected tenants were there on the lands. It was only by making them relinquish their right over the land, that the assessee rsquo s title became perfect and the payment of Rs. 60,000 each to the two protected tenants was an expenditure incurred for the purpose of perfecting the assessee rsquo s title and as such constituted, as held by the Calcutta High court in the aforesaid case, cost of acquisition of the lands. We accordingly direct that the sum of Rs. 1,20,000 paid by the assessee to the two protected tenants be allowed as an admissible deduction being cost of acquisition of the lands in computing the capital gains. 11. In the result, the appeals are partly allowed.
-
1977 (12) TMI 52 - ITAT GAUHATI
... ...
... ... ..... avour with the Dame Fortune and the assessee earned Rs. 7,95,782 as gross amount during the year and after payment of Rs. 1,50,385 to the financiers had still with him the balance of Rs. 6,45,395 as gross income. On these facts it, could not be stated that the benefit derived by the assessee from the financiers sums was not enough to justify the payments to them. This ground of the Revenue is absolutely untenable and has to be rejected. Thus when we see the issue from various angles required under s. 40A (2a), we are unable to find a justification in the action of the Revenue. We, therefore, allow this ground of appeal of the assessee and reversing the order of the AAC direct the ITO to allow the entire payments to the financiers and re-compute the income of the assessee accordingly. Since it is a case of a registered firm, the ITO is also authorised to amend the assessments of the partners accordingly. 14. The appeal is allowed in part as a ground was not argued and pressed.
-
1977 (12) TMI 51 - ITAT GAUHATI
... ...
... ... ..... he addition on finding that there were contra-entries in the Hawlati account for this sum in respect of which no adverse inference need be drawn. The Revenue is not able to assail the finding of fact given by the AAC that there were contra-entries in the accounts and, therefore, there was in fact no extra credit of Rs. 20,000 which remained to be explained. On behalf of the Revenue stress was laid on the fact that the assessee originally gave a false explanation. But this does not take the Revenue any further since that explanation though obviously incorrect did not falsify the correct explanation which is supported by the books of the assessee. In the circumstances, we find no reason to interfere with the order of the AAC in this regard. 16. Since we have deleted the addition of Rs. 97,127 and Rs. 6,422, we direct the Income-tax Officer to recompute the total income. 17. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the cross-objection of the Revenue is dismissed.
-
1977 (12) TMI 50 - ITAT GAUHATI
... ...
... ... ..... the assessments for the years 1965-66 to 1972-73 in view of certain instructions issued by the CBDT taking into consideration the decision of their lordships of the Supreme Court reported in 103 ITR 536 SC. This fact was not controverted by the Revenue. Hence the order from which the penalties emanated stand cancelled. As such the penalties cannot be levied. The penalties for the asst. yrs. 1965-66 to 1971-72 now under appeal before us at the instance of the assessee are cancelled. The appeals of the assessee are allowed. The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed.
-
1977 (12) TMI 49 - ITAT GAUHATI
... ...
... ... ..... assessee has been disbursing huge sums for charity for 20 years and the properties from which the sums came by way of rentals are held under trust. These particulars have been recorded in detail by the AAC and the Revenue has nothing to meet these undisputed facts. Thus even on proved facts, we find that is a valid charitable trust and has been accepted and acted upon by all concerned including the Revenue. The order of the AAC is, therefore, on sound basis and we cannot interfere in it at the in stance of the Revenue. 15. In any case the AAC giving a finding about the validity of the trust has set aside the assessments with the directions to the ITO to examine and decide the quantum of the exemption available to the assessee. The assessee had not pressed its appeals against these directions. We, therefore, confirm the directions of the AAC. 16. The result is that all the appeals by the Revenue as well as by the assessee and the cross objection of the assessee are dismissed.
-
1977 (12) TMI 48 - ITAT GAUHATI
... ...
... ... ..... soon as the income was computed for filing the return. We, therefore, find that the assessee had reasonable cause for delay in submission of the returns as he believed bona fide that he was not required to file the return voluntarily and accordingly he neither filed the return nor took any steps to pay the tax in advance. It cannot be doubted that the assessee has committed the default but these defaults are of a venial nature and though technically the penalty provisions of law may be attracted yet the authorities imposing the penalty would be justified in not levying the penalties if there was no conscious disregard of the provisions of law. In this case there is no evidence placed on behalf of the Revenue that the defaults resulted due to conscious disregard of the provisions of law. Since the assessee had a reasonable cause for delay in submission of the return and in not filing the estimate, penalties cannot be sustained. These are cancelled. 10. The appeals are allowed.
-
1977 (12) TMI 47 - ITAT GAUHATI
... ...
... ... ..... fact remains that these creditors were income-tax assessees and their file numbers were also supplied by the assessees. In the circumstances, it is obvious that there is no evidence directly contradicting the claims of the assessee that these transactions were genuine loans. The tow facts, namely, that the creditors were known to be name lenders and that the summons were returned unserved may cast some suspicion but are not sufficient to disprove the case of the assessee. We are, therefore, satisfied that the addition of the said amount of Rs. 70,000 by rejecting the explanation of the assessee was not justified by the facts of the case. We, therefore, direct the addition to be deleted. The interest paid on the loans must also be allowed as was done in the original assessment order. We, accordingly, cancel the re-assessment order and restore the original assessment. The ITO is also authorised to amend the assessment of the partners as a consequence. 8. The appeal is allowed.
-
1977 (12) TMI 46 - ITAT DELHI-D
... ...
... ... ..... sion of the Madras High Court in Madras Industrial Linings Ltd. vs. ITO (2) lends considerable support to the assessee s contention on this point. 8. We are therefore, of the view that the mistake alleged by the ITO, if any, is not a mistake apparent from the record within the meaning of s. 154 of the Act. The issues involved are not so simple as assumed by the ITO and the AAC. On the contrary, they involve long drawn debate and discussion both on facts and on points of law. In our view, the ratio of the decision of the Supreme Court in T.S. Balaram, ITO vs. Volkart Bros(3). directly applicable to the facts of the present case. The decision in T.S. Rajan vs. CED(4), relied on by Shri C.V. Gupte is of no help to the Revenue, in the right of our discussion above. 9. In the result, we allow the appeal, setting aside the orders of the authorities below on this point and direct the ITO to allow the deduction of Rs. 26,987 under s. 80J as originally allowed in the assessment order.
-
1977 (12) TMI 45 - ITAT DELHI-D
... ...
... ... ..... eal. The first contention in this appeal challenges the order of the Appellate Asstt. Commissioner allowing a deduction of 65 per cent from the amount of enhanced compensation of over Rs. 52 lakhs in determining the break up value of the shares of M/s. DLF United Pvt. Ltd. In the light of our finding that only the actual amount received by the assessee should be treated as the sale proceeds and that the provisions of s. 52(2) of the Act cannot be made applicable to the case. 27. The next contention in this appeal relates to allowance by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of certain interest from the profit of Rs. 1,37,445 brought to tax by the Income-tax Officer and confirmed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. We have already held that a finding on this issue is also not necessary in view of our finding that the amount of Rs. 1,37,445 is not at all liable to tax. 28. In the result while the assessee rsquo s appeal is partly allowed that by the Department is dismissed.
-
1977 (12) TMI 44 - ITAT DELHI-D
... ...
... ... ..... on such as whether an appeal lies against computation of interest and whether interest could be charged separately for default in payment of tax. On the other hand, the decision relied by the assessee is directly on the point. It has been held by the Jammu and Kashmir High Court in the case of S. Mubarik Shah Nagshbandi vs. CIT that the determination of tax payable by the assessee is an much mandatory as determination of income. If the ITO has not determined the tax payable by the assessee in the assessment order that omission would invalidate the assessment order. In the present case, admittedly, the assessment order does not contain the computation of tax and other sums due by the assessee on the face of it and, therefore, the assessment order is invalid. It must, accordingly be annulled. 5. In view of our finding that the assessment order is invalid, we find it unnecessary to deal with other grounds of appeal raised by the assessee. 6. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1977 (12) TMI 43 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... at there was a reasonable course for the delay, it is not necessary for us to go into the academic question whether for purposes of levying the penalty the date of filing the first return or the date of filing the second return should be considered. 7. The cross objection filed by the Revenue is late by one day. The notice of the assessee having filed the appeal against the order of the AAC was received by the ITO on 2nd Aug., 1976 and the cross objection was due to be filed within a period of 30 days which expired on 1st Sept., 1976. The cross objection was filed on 2nd Sept., 1976. There is no written application for condonation of delay and at the time of hearing also we were not provided with any material to establish sufficient cause for the delay in filing the cross objection. The cross objection is, therefore, treated as time barred and is not admitted. 8. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the cross objection filed by the Revenue is dismissed.
-
1977 (12) TMI 42 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... 4. After hearing the learned Representative of both the parties, I am not inclined to sustain any penalty. Penalty under s. 271(1)(c) can be levied when an assessee is guilty of concealment of income. In this case, the assessee cannot be held to be guilty of any concealment of income because the income from interest which is alleged to have been concealed itself was taxed on protective basis. The taxability of an amount on a protective basis is not enough for holding that the assessee is guilty of concealment of income. The assessee has not received any interest from Rani Tikka Gunwant Kaur and even though it is stated by the IAC that the assessee confirmed the receipt of interest but this fact is disputed by the assessee. In any case, there is no evidence on record to suggest that either the assessee gave a loan of Rs. 25,000 or any interest was received in these two years. The penalties levied in both the years are cancelled. 5. In the result, both the appeals are allowed.
-
1977 (12) TMI 41 - ITAT BOMBAY-A
... ...
... ... ..... t that nothing further need or could be done. In fact that entries on the order-sheet do indicate that except for the one default on 29th Jan., 1974 both or either of the partners did attend before the ITO whenever called and co-operated to the best of their abilities. Even their statements were recorded by issuing summons and nothing has been found by the ITO more than what was shown in the returns except for making ex-parte assessments. The very fact that the highest IT authority, i.e. the CIT considered it proper to reduce the incomes assessed drastically indicates that there was no intention of avoiding or not complying with the notices out of any malafide motives. Taking all these facts into consideration, we hold that even the penalties under s. 271(1)(b) are not justified because the assessee had not filed without reasonable cause to comply with the notices issued by the ITO. We, therefore, cancel these penalties also. 7. As a result, all the four appeals are allowed.
-
1977 (12) TMI 40 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-B
... ...
... ... ..... respect of the assessment of that year. 4. In our view, it is not necessary to deal with the second aspect i.e. the date from which the default was committed. The ITO has not mentioned in his order anything to indicate that he was satisfied that the assessee had committed this default he has not given any direction in the order to issue notice for this default. No doubt the show cause notice has been issued along with the demand notice but the demand notice could necessarily be prepared after the ITO. has signed the order. No indication was brought to our notice from anywhere in the file that the ITO. was satisfied before passing the order that the assessee had committed default under s. 212(3-A). We, therefore, hold that this preliminary condition of the ITO. s satisfaction in the course of assessment proceedings is not fulfilled and hence imposition of penalty is not justified. We allow the assessee s appeal on this aspect. We do not therefore, deal with the other aspect.
........
|
