|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 121 to 140 of 3459 Records
-
1991 (12) TMI 105 - ITAT COCHIN
... ...
... ... ..... demic if there is no income liable to tax because under Chapter VIA, the relief to be granted is available only when there is gross total income and not otherwise and as it appeared to me there does not appear to be a gross total income to the assessee. In any way this is a matter to be examined by the regular Bench, before whom this matter will now go back to decide the appeals according to the majority view, although this was not a point referred to me as a point of difference of opinion. 15. Having considered all the aspects of the case and the case law cited before me and the facts of the case, I am of the opinion that the assessee has not manufactured any articles or things independent of the main contract to claim the benefit under section 80J and under section 80HH and the view expressed by the learned Accountant Member commends itself to me and I agree with it. 16. The matter will now go before the regular Bench for deciding the appeals according to the majority view.
-
1991 (12) TMI 104 - ITAT COCHIN
Firm, Registration ... ... ... ... ..... Court in Nalli Venkataramana s case and the Patna High Court in the case of Narpati Khan and Co., to mean that where the licence for trading in liquor stood in the name of one partner and he formed a partnership to run the liquor business it did not amount to a transfer of the licence in violation of the Abkari Rules and there was no illegality in the partnership so as to be denied registration. Moreover, it has been held by the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Three Aces s case that if out of several activities of a firm, one activity turns out to be illegal, that would not render the constitution of the firm illegal or disentitle it to registration or renewal of registration under the Income-tax Act. Thus, in any view of the matter, we are convinced that the assessee was entitled to registration and we accordingly confirm the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. 14. Our answers to the questions referred are in the negative. 15. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.
-
1991 (12) TMI 103 - ITAT COCHIN
Deduction Of Bonus ... ... ... ... ..... or profession carried on by a firm has been discontinued or where a firm is dissolved the Income-tax Officer shall make an assessment of the total income of the firm as if no such discontinuance or dissolution had taken place and by section 2(24)(v) of the Act, income will include any sum chargeable to income-tax under section 41 also. Therefore, we hold that the dissolution had taken place during the previous year but still the firm can be assessed in respect of the profits arising in the course of its winding up. That is what has been done in this case. The revenue s contention is also supported by the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Sreehari Lodge. 13. Though the assessee would appear to be aggrieved with the addition of Rs. 7,000 towards rent and the disallowances of Rs. 4,000 we do not find any specific ground of appeal on the above and, therefore, we decline to entertain the plea of the advocate to consider the issues. 14. In the result, the appeal is dismissed
-
1991 (12) TMI 102 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
Penalty, Penalty For Failure To Comply With Provisions Of s. 269SS ... ... ... ... ..... ide belief that no offence was being committed. The levy of penalty is not automatic since the Hon ble Supreme Court of India, in the case of Motilal Padampat Sugar Mills Co. Ltd. v. State of U.P. 1979 118 ITR 326, has observed that there is no presumption that every person knows the law. It is often said that everyone is presumed to know the law, but that is not a correct statement there is no such maxim known to the law. 29. Income-tax laws being what they have been said to be and talked of, real complex in nature and section 271D having been brought on the statute book by insertion of Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1987, with effect from 1-4-1989 and the assessment year involved in this appeal being 1989-90, within the meaning of this section and in terms of the ratio of the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court, referred to above, the facts of the assessee s case did not attract levy of penalty. I hold accordingly. The impugned order stands upheld and the revenue fails.
-
1991 (12) TMI 101 - ITAT CALCUTTA-E
S.10, True Nature ... ... ... ... ..... tence, that it could be available to the assessee as book profits could be and that it will constitute an asset of the assessee on the relevant valuation date, under the Wealth-tax Act also. Their Lordships of the Kerala High Court, therefore, held that the Tribunal was in error in holding that the additions made in the income-tax assessment for the very same year could not be considered to be assets for the purpose of wealth-tax on the relevant valuation date in the said case. 15. In the light of the above discussion, it would be seen that the assessee has failed to discharge its burden of proof under section 68 of the Act in respect of this cash credit of Rs. 5,11,680 appearing in its Cash Book on 22-3-1985 and, therefore, the I.T.O. was fully justified in bringing the same to charge as its income for the year under appeal. We, therefore, reverse the order of the CIT (Appeals) and restore the addition of Rs. 5,11,680 made by the ITO. 16. In the result, the appeal is allowed
-
1991 (12) TMI 100 - ITAT CALCUTTA-D
Legal Representative ... ... ... ... ..... e deceased who is not existent in this world. Thus, in our view the penal proceedings abate on the death of an assessee. 5. We also find much force in the submission of the learned counsel for the assessee that when in law all the trustees are considered as legal representatives, then all of them ought to have been heard by the ITO before the levy of the impugned penalties. There is ample support to this submission by the judgment of the Gauhati High Court in Jai Prakash Singh s case. It is evident from records that all the trustees were not heard before levy of the impugned penalties. The impugned penalty orders, therefore, suffer from the serious non-compliance of the mandatory provisions of section 274 and section 282 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 6. In view of the foregoing discussion the penalties levied are hereby cancelled and the ITO is directed to refund the penalty amounts, if any, collected in the meantime from the trustees. 7. In the result, the appeals are allowed
-
1991 (12) TMI 99 - ITAT CALCUTTA-C
... ...
... ... ..... wellery belonging to the various persons as well as their probable values at the time of their acquisition to test the truth and correctness of their claim. Nothing has been pointed out by the Revenue as to how these evaluations made by CIT(A) are not correct or untenable. On the contrary, the evidence brought on record shows that the assessee belongs to a very respectable family of Behala, both on her parents side as well as her husband s side and also belongs to an affluent background. Apart from mere suspicion and conjectures, we find no material which would justify the conclusion that these items of jewellery and silver utensils found in the locker at the time of the search on 7th Jan., 1984represented the undisclosed income of the assessee to justify this addition in her hands. We, therefore, find no merit or substance in the objections raised by the Revenue in this appeal to the order of the CIT(A), which is hereby confirmed. 10. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.
-
1991 (12) TMI 98 - ITAT CALCUTTA-C
Market Fee, Orders Prejudicial To Interests, Trading Receipt ... ... ... ... ..... e decision of the Calcutta High Court in the case of Chowringhee Sales Bureau (P.) Ltd. provide a complete answer to the objection of the Revenue to the allowance of the assessee s claim for deduction of this amount. We, therefore, respectfully follow these decisions which are in favour of the assessee and hold that the sum of Rs. 2,07,514 representing market fee collections is not liable to tax in the hands of the assessee and that, at any rate, it would be allowable as an admissible deduction on the mercantile system of accounting which is being regularly followed by the assessee. It, therefore, follows that the assessment order sought to be revised by the CIT was not erroneous insofar as it was prejudicial to the interests of the revenue and the CIT erred in revising the said order under section 263 of the Act. Accordingly, we cancel the order passed by the CIT under section 263 of the Act and allow the assessee s appeal. 26. In the result, the assessee s appeal is allowed
-
1991 (12) TMI 97 - ITAT CALCUTTA-C
Insurance Premia, Life Insurance, Total Income ... ... ... ... ..... nience would suggest that the receipt be brought to tax in the assessment year 1985-86 subject to the stipulation that if ultimately the amount is directed by the Court to be repaid or refunded by the assessee the same would be allowed as deduction in the year of such repayment. This argument is one of convenience. A receipt can be brought to tax only if it is found, on a proper analysis of the nature thereof and the rights of the parties to the dispute, to be income and not merely because it would be convenient to assess it in a particular year. We are unable to accept this submission of the learned departmental representative. 22. In view of the foregoing discussion, we are of the opinion that the excise duty rebate of Rs. 26,13,819 received by the assessee during the accounting year relevant to the assessment year 1985-86 was rightly directed by the CIT(Appeals) to be excluded from the assessment. 23. to 31. These paras are not reproduced here as they involve minor issues.
-
1991 (12) TMI 96 - ITAT CALCUTTA-B
Assessment Order, Delay In Filing Return, Failure To Pay Advance Tax, False Estimate, Late Filing, Levy Of Penalty, Original Assessment, Penalty Proceedings
-
1991 (12) TMI 95 - ITAT CALCUTTA-A
Additions To Income, True Nature ... ... ... ... ..... the assessee and that, therefore, there was no justification for disallowing a portion of the interest of Rs. 15,681 which was rightly deleted by the CIT(Appeals) in that year. The Tribunal had, therefore, dismissed the departmental appeal for that year and there is no dispute that this decision of the Tribunal has become final as no reference application has been filed by the Revenue against the said order. In fact, in this year the CIT(Appeals) also found that there was no nexus between the borrowing and the personal expenses as alleged by the ITO to justify the disallowance made by him. There is no material placed before us to rebut this finding of the CIT(Appeals). Respectfully following the earlier order of the Appellate Tribunal quoted above, we confirm the order of the CIT(Appeals) on this issue also. 33. In the result, the assessee s appeal in ITA No. 1974(Cal)/87 is partly allowed for statistical purposes. The departmental appeal in ITA No. 2204(Cal)/87 is dismissed
-
1991 (12) TMI 94 - ITAT CALCUTTA-A
Business Loss, Carrying On Business, Equity Shares ... ... ... ... ..... ould not be allowed as business loss. On the contrary, in the present case, it is clearly established an facts that the shares of Madras Vanaspati Ltd. represented the stock-in-trade of the money lending business of the assessee-company as they were acquired in the course of money lending business and in lieu of money lending debt due from the said Madras Vanaspati Ltd. We, therefore, respectfully follow the decision of the hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Pandit Narain Dutt Chhimwal and hold that the loss of Rs. 3 lakhs arising on the sale of shares (about the quantum of which there is no dispute before us) is a revenue loss which arose to the assessee in the course of its money lending business on the realisation of the money lending assets and, therefore, it is allowable in the computation of its business income. Accordingly, we accept the contention of the assessee s learned Chartered Accountant and allow the assessee s appeal. 13. In the result, the appeal is allowed
-
1991 (12) TMI 93 - ITAT CALCUTTA-A
Failure To Pay Advance Tax, False Estimate, Levy Of Penalty, Reason To Believe ... ... ... ... ..... on of the assessee s learned counsel. The amount of penalty levied is the minimum amount of penalty of 10 per cent of the tax as specified in section 273(2)(a) of the Act and there is no dispute about the quantum of penalty levied. In the absence of any materials placed by the appellant either before the departmental authorities or even before us to substantiate the alleged bona fide miscalculation, we find ourselves unable to accept the assessee s contention that the levy of penalty was not justified on the facts of the present case. We, therefore, hold that the departmental authorities were justified in their conclusion that the estimates of advance tax filed by the assessee on 12-12-1975 and 15-3-1976 were estimates which the assessee knew or had reason to believe to be untrue within the meaning of section 273(2)(a) of the Act and that the levy of penalty was fully justified. Accordingly, we confirm the order of the CIT (Appeals). 13. In the result, the appeal is dismissed
-
1991 (12) TMI 92 - ITAT BOMBAY-E
Interpretation OF STATUTES ... ... ... ... ..... tain irrational belief of the workers. A part of the expenditure was for providing food to the workers. It was disallowed by the ITO under section 37(2A) holding it to be entertainment expenditure, but this disallowance was restricted by the CIT (Appeals) to Rs. 3,400 taking into consideration some element of entertainment and the fact that the extent of expenditure was unverifiable. We see no reason to interfere with this order of the CIT (Appeals). The expenditure was for business of the assessee because without dispelling the fear, the workers would not have come to work. Moreover, the expenditure was on employees and the retrospective amendment to section 37(2A) does not apply to such an expenditure. In any case, the CIT (Appeals) has sustained the disallowance suitably, i.e., up to Rs. 3,400 to cover unverifiable nature of the expenditure. This ground is, therefore, rejected. 30. In the result, assessee s appeal is allowed partly and the department s appeal is dismissed.
-
1991 (12) TMI 91 - ITAT BOMBAY-E
Expenditure Incurred ... ... ... ... ..... ature and cannot be linked with the profession carried on by the assessee. In the very nature of the operation undergone by the assessee, it is difficult to hold that the expenditure incurred by the assessee could be split into two segments, one concerning the profession carried on by him and the other for a desire to live longer. In this view of the matter, we are not prepared to accept the submissions made on behalf of the assessee that at least a part of the expenditure incurred by the assessee should be allowed in computing his professional income. The order of the Tribunal, in the case of B.K Seshu would also not be of any help to the assessee, as the facts and circumstances obtaining in the instant case are clearly distinguishable from the one obtaining in that case. 10. For the aforesaid reasons, we have no hesitation in upholding the action of the IT authorities, disallowing the assessee s claim for deduction of Rs. 1,29,190. 11. In the result, the appeal is dismissed
-
1991 (12) TMI 90 - ITAT BOMBAY-D
Development Allowance, Investment Allowance, Plant And Machinery ... ... ... ... ..... e view, in our opinion, finds support from the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Distributors (Baroda) (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India 1985 155 ITR 120, wherein it has been held that as a matter of plain grammer, the words such income by way of dividends (in that case under section 80M) ( such profits and gains in section 80HH in this case) must have reference to the income of profits and gains mentioned earlier in the section and that would be income or profits and gains, as the case may be which was included in the gross total income. Gross total income of an assessee includes that profits and gains as are computed as per the provisions of the Act, that is to say, after allowing weighted deduction under section 35B as against the actual expenditure incurred by the assessee. In the circumstances, we reverse the order of the CIT (Appeals) on the point and restore that of the Assessing Officer. 21 and 22. These paras are not reproduced here as they involve minor issues.
-
1991 (12) TMI 89 - ITAT BOMBAY-C
Revised Return, Trading Liability ... ... ... ... ..... essee made a claim that the liabilities in respect of these entries have not ceased. However, this contrary position taken by the assessee in the revised return is not supported by any evidence. 14.2 It is also seen that till 12-12-1991, the assessee has not paid a single paisa towards these liabilities as admitted by Shri Kamat, the learned Representative for the assessee, during the course of hearing on a specific query put by the Bench. Thus, keeping in view the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that in the present case the liabilities of Rs. 2,01,431.83 which were originally declared by the assessee as profit by debiting to the various creditors account and crediting to the profit and loss account have, in fact, ceased and as such the authorities below were justified in taxing the same as the income of the assessee. In the result, this ground of appeal is decided against the assessee. 15. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed
-
1991 (12) TMI 88 - ITAT BOMBAY-C
Accounting Year, Assessing Officer, Income From Property, Religious Trust ... ... ... ... ..... in the balance-sheet by mistake, the amount was shown as advance to the S.P. Trust. In preceding years also the same nomenclature was used and exemption under section 11 was granted to the assessee. 6. After carefully considering the factual aspect of the matter, we are of the opinion that the use of term advances to S. P. Trust as used in the balance sheet of the assessee trust was misnomer. This mistake of expression cannot be used against the assessee. Nomenclature is not a decisive guide. It is incumbent on the part of the Assessing Officer to penetrate the veil and find out the real nature of the transaction. In our opinion, amount in question cannot be treated as investment . Having regard to this fact, we are of the opinion, that the case of the assessee is beyond the ken of section 11(5). The assessee trust is, therefore, entitled to get benefit under section 11 of the Act. We uphold the order of the CIT(Appeals). In the result, appeal of the revenue stands dismissed.
-
1991 (12) TMI 87 - ITAT BOMBAY-A
... ...
... ... ..... presentative relied on the order of the Assessing Officer. 7. We have considered the submissions made on either side. We agree with the CIT(A) that there was no justification for treating any portion of the expenditure incurring in India as relatable to the receipts abroad. This is a case of a well-known artiste who went to various countries abroad, rendered musical concerts and earned foreign income. All such concerts were organised by her sponsors who met the expenses of organising the concerts abroad as well as the assessee s travelling expenses. The nature of expenses incurred in India also does not give any indication to suggest that any such expenses could be adjusted against receipts on which s. 80RR is claimed. On scrutiny of the papers filed on record and after considering the submissions made, we are of the view that the order of the CIT(A) is correct and does not call for any interference. The same is hereby confirmed. 8. The appeal by the Department is dismissed.
-
1991 (12) TMI 86 - ITAT BOMBAY-A
Export Business, Foreign Exchange ... ... ... ... ..... for the purposes of granting REP licences. Though the assessee had not applied for such entitlement, yet we find an example to this effect in the case of Burlingtons of Bombay IT Appeal No. 5611 (Bom.) of 1987 dated 4-10-1991 , wherein import entitlement to the extent of Rs. 9,700 on one occasion and Rs. 6,800 on another occasion was noticed to have been granted to the assessee. These facts would thus establish that even the relevant authority, i.e. the Joint Chief Controller of Export and Import has treated such sales to the tourists in foreign exchange as export sales while issuing the import licence. In this case, the Tribunal has allowed the assessee s claim for 80HHC deduction. 13. Taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances, we are of the opinion that the assessee was entitled to 80HHC deduction in respect of the counter sales and the Commissioner (Appeals) was justified in allowing the same. 14. This para is not reproduced here as it involves minor issue.
............
|
