|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 141 to 160 of 2926 Records
-
1989 (12) TMI 91 - ITAT DELHI-A
... ...
... ... ..... of computing perquisite. Accordingly the CIT(A) directed the assessing officer to reduce the amount of HRA paid in cash for working out the disallowance of perquisite under s. 40A(5). 10. The learned counsel for the assessee supported the action of the CIT(A) and relied on the decision of Andhra Pradesh High Court in case of CIT vs. Warner Hindustan Ltd. (1984) 145 ITR 24 (APPEAL). 11. In case of Warner Hindustan Ltd. the Hon ble Andhra Pradesh High Court has held that payments made directly to an employee does not fall within the meaning of the expression perquisites . Therefore, HRA does not fall within the meaning of expression perquisites in sub-s. (5) of 40A and cannot be taken into account for the purpose of disallowance. We find that the CIT(A) has rightly reduced the amount of HRA paid in cash for working out the disallowance of perquisite. No interference is, therefore, called for in the finding of the CIT(A). 12.In the result Revenue s appeal stands partly allowed.
-
1989 (12) TMI 90 - ITAT DELHI-A
... ...
... ... ..... to the facts of this case. However, since providing tea, coffee, etc., to the employees is specifically excluded from the definition of the entertainment, we consider it reasonable that 1/3rd expenses may be considered in connection with providing tea, coffee, etc., to the staff, and accordingly allowable. The assessee will get a relief of Rs. 1,745. 9. The next claim of the assessee was with regard to the disallowance of Rs. 3,000 out of cane research and development expenses. The learned counsel pointed out that complete details have been maintained and were furnished before the assessing officer and therefore there was no justification for any disallowance under this head. The learned counsel further pointed out that certain details were sought by the assessing officer which was filed. Since the expenditure is completely vouched, we do not see any justification for disallowance of Rs. 3,000. The same is accordingly deleted. 10. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed.
-
1989 (12) TMI 89 - ITAT DELHI-A
Accounting Year, Assessment Year, Business Expenditure, Capital Asset, Capital Expenditure, Concessional Rate, Deduction In Respect, Development Allowance, Expenditure Incurred, Expenditure On Scientific Research, Foreign Company, Foreign Enterprise, Guest House, Managing Agent, Revenue Expenditure
-
1989 (12) TMI 88 - ITAT DELHI-A
Additional Tax, Additional Tax, Investment Company, Investment Company, Undistributed Profits
-
1989 (12) TMI 87 - ITAT DELHI-A
Settlement Commission, Settlement Commission ... ... ... ... ..... arned counsel for the assessee referred to section 245C, which relates to the applications for settlement and to section 245BA, which defines the jurisdiction and powers of the Settlement Commission. There is nothing in either of these sections to show that on the acceptance of an application under section 245D(1) the assessment orders can be set aside by the CIT(A) or have to be made afresh in accordance with the directions of the Settlement Commission. In our view the provisions of section 244F(2) are quite clear to the effect that no income-tax authority is left with any jurisdiction to pass any order after an order under section 245D(1) by the Settlement Commission admitting the assessee s application for proceeding with. Consequently, the Commissioner(A) too had no jurisdiction to proceed with the appeals and the order passed by him is, therefore, patently erroneous and unauthorised. We, therefore, allow these appeals and set aside the orders passed by the learned CIT(A)
-
1989 (12) TMI 86 - ITAT DELHI-A
Advance Tax, Advance Tax, Assessed Income, Assessed Income, Interest Payable By Assessee, Interest Payable By Assessee, Tax Authorities, Tax Authorities, Total Income, Total Income
-
1989 (12) TMI 85 - ITAT DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... wner of the said property. The matter came up for consideration before the Tribunal. The Tribunal held that bringing of 1/3rd portion by Smt. Pushpa Rani, partner in the firm should entitle the firm to claim depreciation in case the building to that extent was used for business. It was further held that no registered documents for that purpose was necessary. It was further observed that the partner can invest capital in the firm and the same becomes property of the firm whenever so brought in. It was thus held that the assessee in that case was entitled to depreciation to the extent of 1/3rd of the building brought into by the partner. In view, of this decision with which we agree, it must be held that that portion of that said house which was brought into the firm by the assessee as a partner belonged to the firm and, therefore, its valuation should not be included in the net wealth of the assessee. 8. For the foregoing reasons, the appeals stand allowed as indicated above.
-
1989 (12) TMI 84 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... art of the assessee. Penalty order was cancelled by the learned AAC in the above circumstances. 8. As mentioned earlier, tax liability had already been cleared and thus, in view of the ratio in the case supra of Murugan Timber Depot, no penalty for late filing of return was leviable, when there was no liability to pay tax. The assessee s case appears to be covered by this ratio, laid down by the Hon ble Madras High Court. In any case, no contrary ratio was pointed out to us. Same view is seen to have been taken by the Hon ble Gauhati High Court in the above other two cases. In the case supra of Ganesh Das Sreeram. (Firm), Hon ble High Court has further observed that for determining the assessed tax under s. 271(1)(A), Explanation, and s. 271(1), the tax could not be determined as URF. The facts being not in dispute and these three ratios being aptly applicable on the point, we are satisfied that no interference is indeed called for. 9. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.
-
1989 (12) TMI 83 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
Arbitration Award, Arbitration Award, Capital Gains, Capital Gains, High Court, High Court, Partnership Firm, Partnership Firm, Share In Firm, Share In Firm, Supreme Court, Supreme Court.
-
1989 (12) TMI 82 - ITAT CALCUTTA
... ...
... ... ..... hereby waived. The lower authorities ought to have examined whether there existed any agreement for the loan of Rs. 11,00,000 by the sterling company (which devolved on the assessee) to J.H. Ltd. The time of accrual of interest depends upon the terms and conditions of the agreement. Accrual of interest is different from periodicity of payment of interest. Once accrued, income is liable to charge even if, subsequently, it is foregone and not realised. See the case of Morvi Industries Ltd. vs. CIT (1971) 82 ITR 835 (SC). 9. In the circumstances, I set aside the orders of the lower authorities on the issue of taxability of Rs. 1,65,000 being the interest on loan of Rs. 11,00,000 and restore the matter to the ITO. The ITO is directed to examine the case keeping in view the above discussion and make a fresh assessment as per law after affording the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard. 10. In the result, the appeal is to be treated as allowed for statistical purposes.
-
1989 (12) TMI 81 - ITAT CALCUTTA
Assessment Proceedings, Penalty Proceedings ... ... ... ... ..... ial and legal parlance means something more than the substitution of another obligation for the old one. It means to re-establish a particular contract for another period of time, to restore to its former conditions and obligation on which the time of payment has been extended. Keday v. Petty, 54 N.E. 798, 800, 153 Ind. 179. In the case of a deposit it is repayable according to the terms of the agreement. (Abdul Hamid Sahib v. Rahmat Bi AIR 1965 Mad. 427). Thus, when a deposit is renewed on the basis of a fresh application, a new contract comes into existence. So, the deposits renewed by the assessee with HDFC after 23-11-1981 have to be interpreted as loans first created and so the tax to be charged was only 15 . In the circumstances, there is no error in the assessment order of the ITO. The Commissioner is not justified in setting aside the said assessment order. The impugned order under section 263 dated 14-3-1988 is hereby annulled. 7. In the result, the appeal is allowed
-
1989 (12) TMI 80 - ITAT BOMBAY-E
... ...
... ... ..... deduction of the sum of Rs. 52,935. The Hon ble Kerala High Court held that the loss was allowable even when it was not debited in the profit and loss account and even when the assessee has changed the system of accounting. If anything, the assessee s case is stronger, firstly because it does not involve any change in the method of accounting and secondly because the Department has never made the corresponding addition in past years. It is nobody s case that there is some mistake or unjustified claim in the quantification of said sum of Rs. 11,82,35,007. It cannot be because it is a nationalised bank subject to the internal checks and also supervision by the Reserve Bank of India. We would uphold the decision of the Commissioner(A) on this score. 5. Since we have slightly modified and elaborated the directions of the Commissioner(A) in regard to the point of weighted deduction under s. 35B, the departmental appeal would be treated as partly allowed, for statistical purposes.
-
1989 (12) TMI 79 - ITAT BOMBAY-D
... ...
... ... ..... refore, directed to follow the High Court s interim order and allow depreciation accordingly. 31. After hearing the parties, we find that similar directions given by the CIT(A) in asst. yr. 1980-81 in were confirmed by the Tribunal in ITA No. 423 and 534/Bom/1985, dt. 27th April, 1988. Fact-situation being similar, we do not find any merit in the ground raised by the Revenue on this point, and hence it is rejected. 32. In the cross objections for the two years, the assessee has claimed depreciation with regard to the payments of royalty of Rs. 34,472 and engineering fees of Rs. 55,541 in asst yr. 1976-77 and Rs. 3,39,033 in asst yr. 1977-78 in case they are not allowed as revenue expenditure. As we have confirmed the order of the CIT(A) allowing these two expenditure as revenue in nature, the cross objections do not survive for consideration. The cross objections are therefore rejected. 33. In the result, the appeals are partly allowed and the cross objections are dismissed.
-
1989 (12) TMI 78 - ITAT BOMBAY-D
Assessment Year, Deduction Of Interest, Interest Payable, Levy Sugar Price ... ... ... ... ..... tion and any interest chargeable thereon in terms of the provisions of section 3 of the 1976 Act. Since no interest is payable by the producer in respect of the period during which the interim order of a court under sub-section (4) of section 3 of the 1976 Act is in operation, no such liability fastens on the assessee. 7. As a result of the above discussion and the position of law stated therein, we have come to the conclusion that the assessee was not liable to pay any interest on the amount of the liability relating to excess realisation for the accounting periods relevant to the three assessment years in question. The learned C.I.T. (A), therefore, clearly erred when he allowed the assessee s claim in respect of such deduction. These appeals by the department thus succeed and deserve to be allowed. We, therefore, allow these three appeals and set aside the orders of the learned C.I.T. (A) in relation to the ground raised therein and restore those of the Income-tax Officer.
-
1989 (12) TMI 77 - ITAT BOMBAY-D
Assessment Year, Industrial Company, Industrial Undertaking, Investment Allowance ... ... ... ... ..... construction activity only. The words industrial undertaking have not been defined anywhere in the statute. But as per the accepted meaning given to that expression or as understood in common parlance, it would mean a venture or an enterprise carrying on some activities which had some relation to some industrial activity. In this accepted sense, the assessee was an industrial undertaking and since it was engaged in construction, the same would be entitled to investment allowance. We would like to emphasise that where an assessee carrying on construction activities excluding those of construction of ships would not be treated as industrial company, there would be no legal bar for investment allowance in regard to the cost of the assets installed by a company for carrying on construction activity. In this view of the matter, we are of the view that the CIT(A) was justified in granting the claim of the assessee for investment allowance. 4. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.
-
1989 (12) TMI 76 - ITAT BANGALORE
Any Person, Income From Property, Religious Trust ... ... ... ... ..... enefit of the members. It is the latter case alone that can attract the provisions of section 13(1)(c)(ii). 12. In the instant case, the facts are too clear. The entire income remains intact. After defraying the expenses for earning the income, the net income, respectively, was Rs. 16,737 and Rs. 5,078 for the two years under consideration. This had not been used by the assessee for any purpose, let alone for the benefit of the members. When such is the case, there is hardly a case for applying section 13(1)(c)(ii). For these reasons we reverse the finding of the authorities below and hold that the income of the two years is not implicated by the provisions of sec. 13(1)(c). In other words, the benefits available under sections 11 and 12 of the Act are available to the assessee and the Income-tax Officer shall accordingly give relief in this regard. We record a finding in favour of the assessee on the ground raised in the appeals. 13. The appeals by the assessee stand allowed
-
1989 (12) TMI 75 - ITAT BANGALORE
A Firm, Net Wealth, Valuation Date ... ... ... ... ..... not exactly be the same as what is declared after the valuation date. Due regard must be had for two factors the uncertainty of the point of time at which dividend is likely to be declared and the exact amount. Further, a purchaser of a right like this would not be willing to pay the same amount which he would be expecting to be paid by the Coffee Board at an unknown future point of time. Therefore, an estimation at a discounted rate would be very much reasonable and eminently justified. When it is a question of estimation, one has to only hazard a reasonable estimation and in our view a discount by 40 is reasonable by all standards. 13. In the result, we direct that the value of the right to receive coffee pool dividends may be taken at 60 of the amount actually declared after the valuation date. The Wealth-tax Officer shall accordingly recompute the net wealth of the firm bearing in mind the above direction. 14. In the result, the appeals shall be treated as allowed in part
-
1989 (12) TMI 74 - ITAT AMRITSAR
... ...
... ... ..... , was not available Therefore, in fact, the benefits of s. 80L(1) from 1st April, 1971 were contemplated in respect of individuals (in whatever category they came from) and Hindu Undivided families only. May be that in the third category the amendment became necessary but there was no other change in respect of Individual. 18. Therefore the Income-tax Authorities were wholly justified in correcting legal errors by taking recourse to the provisions of s. 154 of the Act and withdrew the relief given. The assessees, must therefore, fail on this score. 19. Independent of the above, if there would be said to be any doubt the same came to be statutorily clarified by the insertion of sub-s. (3) to s. 80L of the Act, which could not be said to be amendment on the provisions by any stretch of imagination. 20. The assessee accordingly fails on two counts independent of each other though my reasons are different than the one given by the lower authorities. 21. Result Appeals dismissed.
-
1989 (12) TMI 73 - ITAT ALLAHABAD-B
Assessment Proceedings, Reassessment Proceedings, Time Limit For Completion ... ... ... ... ..... ted in the abovementioned decisions. As already stated earlier, Rani Dayawati Devi was not a party to the proceedings in which it was held that the properties in question do not belong to Raja Y.D. Dubey and belong to Rani Dayawati Devi. In those proceedings, the material question that had arisen for determination was whether the properties in question belong to Raja Y.D. Dubey. The finding that the property actually belongs to Rani Dayawati Devi was only incidental and cannot be said to be a finding or direction within the meaning of these expressions as used in sub-sec. (2) of sec. 17 of the Wealth-tax Act. Therefore, the assessments framed in the case of Rani Dayawati Devi cannot be held to have been made in consequence of or to give effect to any finding or direction of the AAC. Thus, it becomes clear that the assessments have been completed out of time. 17. For the reasons discussed above, the appeals are allowed and the orders of the authorities below are hereby quashed
-
1989 (12) TMI 72 - ITAT ALLAHABAD-A
Method Of Accounting, Valuation Of Stock ... ... ... ... ..... ee accepted a part of the system of method of valuation adopted by the assessee. The Tribunal indicated that the value of the stock which has been sold and realised up to 30-11-78 can be taken as the value of the stock in hand on the last date of the preceding year. However, the Tribunal did not accept that the unsold stock should be valued on the prevailing rate as on 30-11-78. The Tribunal valued the unsold stock following the method of cost or market rate whichever is lower as on 30-6-78. In the said circumstances, the change made by the assessee in valuation of stock during the year under appeal was not found bona fide completely. A part of the system has already been accepted and, therefore, the Tribunal has given its finding on the alternative argument of the assessee which is evident from para 22 of the Tribunal s order where direction has been given to the ITO to value the closing stock. 11. In the result, the misc. application filed by the assessee is partly allowed.
............
|
