|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 101 to 120 of 241 Records
-
1983 (1) TMI 143 - ITAT HYDERABAD-A
A Firm, Interest Paid By Firm, Minor Child, Partnership Deed, Total Income ... ... ... ... ..... rm simply because these funds belonged either to a partner or to the minors who had been admitted to the benefits of the partnership. It is thus clear that the interest at least indirectly arose and accrued to the wife and the minor sons because of their capacity mentioned in section 16(3)(a)(i) and (ii) in the Income-tax Act. (pp. 276-77), directly applies to the facts of the case. From the facts and circumstances of the case we have no hesitation to hold that the minors earned this interest income because of the membership of the firm or because of their admission to the benefits of the firm. We also hold that the minors allowed the use of their profits by the firm without any specific arrangement as would naturally be entered into if the funds have belonged to a stranger. We also hold that the interest is allowed by the firm to the minors in pursuance of clause 5 of the deed. Therefore, interest is disallowable. We see no merits in these two appeals and they are dismissed.
-
1983 (1) TMI 142 - ITAT HYDERABAD-A
Assessment Year, Business Connection, Foreign Company, Previous Year ... ... ... ... ..... on of appointment of an agent is academic. Even otherwise, it is academic because the time limit set out for making an assessment on an agent under section 148 of the Act has already lapsed. No assessment has yet been completed and much less initiated within the time. Even on this ground it is academic. We do not, therefore, propose to go into the issue as to whether the agreement spelt out any stable relationship necessitating the appointment of the Indian company as the agent of the foreign company. The agreement has already been acted upon and the payment is pending and that is only because of the Reserve Bank regulations and income-tax dispute. No taxable event has occurred during the year and the agreement cannot be said to be in force. In any view of the matter, the order of the first appellate authority has to be upheld. Accordingly, we dismiss the departmental appeal. 8. In the result, both the appeals are dismissed in the manner indicated in the preceding paragraphs.
-
1983 (1) TMI 141 - ITAT DELHI-D
... ...
... ... ..... y in the year in which the levy is made. The ld. departmental representative, on the other hand, contends that the very concept of determination of annual value u/s. 23(1) and on deductions u/s. 24 is that deductions should be allowed only for one year and not for more than one year, while determining the annual value for a particular year. 4. We have considered the rival contentions, the only authority available on the point at issue is of Madras High Court in (1981) 132 ITR 416 (Mad) and that is in favour of the assessee. Their Lordships have held that when the municipal authorities levy a tax, then only the assessee can claim it as a deduction. That being the position, we allow the appeal and hold that since the house tax liability was levied by the municipal corporation for the first time during the year ending 31st March,1979 for the entire period of 20th Novemner, 1975 to 31st March, 1979, the assessee was entitled to a deduction of Rs. 20,648. 5. The appeal is allowed.
-
1983 (1) TMI 140 - ITAT DELHI-C
... ...
... ... ..... against the assessee due short deduction of tax at source . 4. After having heard the parties. I am of the view that the CIT(A) was correct in holding that at the stage of checking the deduction of tax at source the ITO could not enter into a controversial question regarding the declaration of the value of the perquisite in the case of a particular employee. This could be done only in the assessment of the employee himself. It is not the case of the Revenue that the deduction of tax at source was lower than the salary which was shown to have been paid by the employer to the employee. I have also been informed that in the case of the Managing Director there has been no attempt to assess the value of the perquisite by enhancing it. The action of the ITO, therefore, cannot be justified. The additional demand raised at this stage by treating the assessee company as a defaulter was, therefore, not correct. The order of the CIT(A) is, therefore, upheld. 5. The appeal is dismissed.
-
1983 (1) TMI 139 - ITAT DELHI-C
Assessed Income, Assessment Order, Reference To IAC ... ... ... ... ..... The ITO completed the assessment of the deceased assessee without complying with the procedure laid down in section 144B. The AAC in the appeal filed by the deceased assessee noticed the violation of procedure prescribed by section 144B. In these circumstances, the AAC was competent to set aside and not annul the assessment, in view of the ratio of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Kapurchand Shrimal. Rather, the AAC was under the statutory obligation to pass such an order. This view of ours also finds support from the ratio of the decision of the Supreme Court in Guduthur Brothers as also the ratio of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Ram Gopal Neotia. We hold likewise. 10. The cases relied upon by the learned counsel for the legal heir of the deceased assessee do not run counter to our above conclusion. They are also distinguishable on facts. 11. In the result, the appeal by the legal heir of the deceased assessee fails and is hereby dismissed.
-
1983 (1) TMI 138 - ITAT CUTTACK
Assessment Year, Cross Gift, Net Wealth ... ... ... ... ..... nor children of the donors in question. This contention, in our opinion, goes to the root of the matter and it would be in the interest of substantial justice if the assessee is allowed to lead evidence in this regard. It is true that the assessee did not or could not lead evidence before the AAC on this point, but for that matter the assessee should not, in our opinion, be precluded from leading evidence even at this stage. We entertain the assessee s request in this regard and restore the matter back to the WTO who will verify for himself whether any of the children to whom the cross gifts had been made, while they were minor, had become major on the valuation dates in question. If there be any, the asset held by such child who has become major cannot be included in the wealth of the respective assessees in terms of section 4(1)(a)(iii). With these observations, we restore the matter back to the WTO. 14. For statistical purposes, the appeals will be taken as partly allowed.
-
1983 (1) TMI 137 - ITAT COCHIN
... ...
... ... ..... that the municipal valuation cannot be in all circumstances the annual value for the purpose of determining the income under the head property . It has been held that other circumstances like the location of the property, the rent that it could fetch normally should be taken into account. In the case before us, the ITO has not taken into account these other circumstances for fixing the annual value at Rs.7000. He has merely taken the annual value at 5 of the cost of construction estimated by him. We agree with the assessee that this manner of determining the annual value is artificial and arbitrary. In the absence of any other material that has been brought on record by the revenue, we are unable to say that the municipal valuation would not indicate the annual value of the property for our purposes. We, therefore, uphold the order of the AAC in this regard. 8. In the result, the appeal by the assessee will be treated as allowed while the appeal by the revenue is dismissed.
-
1983 (1) TMI 136 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... n but it was his duty to levy tax on the entire income that had escaped assessment during that year and that dislodges the contention of the ld. Departmental representative that partial partition could not be claimed in the course of reassessment proceedings. 11. We are not intentionally repeating the details of amounts partitioned on respective details of amounts partitioned on respective dates as the same shall be mere repetition, the same having been detailed by the ld. AAC in para 2 of her order. Looking to the facts, it is a clear case of partial partition and, therefore, Cl. (b) of Explanation annexed to s. 171 governs it and looking to the facts, therefore, the revenue s contention that karat s wife and daughter were not given any share, could not be damaging to the interest and claim of the assessee. In the light of the above discussion and for the reasons given by the AAC, her action in confirmed for all the years. 12. In the result, revenue s appeals are dismissed.
-
1983 (1) TMI 135 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... 1976 on the ground that no substantial thereafter received the assessment orders for the asst. yrs. 1975-76. The amount has been indicated supra in the course of this judgement. It is, thereafter clear that the assessee could have debited its books of account only in the year in which the liability became clearly enforceable upon the assessee. In the year of account for the which the liability became clear the assessee also paid the amount. Therefore we do not see how the claim of the assessee could be refused in view of what has been stated above. The assessee s case is on facts entirely different from the facts of the cases discussed above and the case of the assessee is on a better footing. Therefore, taking every thing in to consideration we are of the opinion that the CIT(A) rightly allowed the claim of the assessee for the year under appeal. His order is upheld and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed. 11. Both the appeal as well as the cross objection are dismissed.
-
1983 (1) TMI 134 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... ealing with the penalties imposable. It is not in dispute that the minimum penalty imposable in the case before us exceeded a sum of Rs. 1,000. Therefore, the ITO was not competent to levy the penalty. However, we find that impugned penalty order was made by the ITO and not by the IAC. It appears that the impugned penalty order made by the ITO on 9th Feb., 1975 is under the mistaken belief that the law for imposition of penalty for concealment is different from the law as on the date on which the return is filed. This is apparently in contradiction with the judgment of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case Brij Mohan, referred to supra. The penalty has been levied by an authority i.e., the IAC who was competent to do so. Therefore, the penalty is bad is law. It is cancelled. 16. Since we have cancelled the penalty on the legal ground, we do not think it necessary to go into the other contentions of the parties before us relating to the merits of the case. 17. Appeal allowed.
-
1983 (1) TMI 133 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... iders with out interest. In so far as the borrowings in earlier year are concerned, it has been projected by the ld. Counsel for the assessee and it has not been controverted by the revenue that the interest of Haryana Rice Mills is connected with Parkash Agriculture Farm the money received from Parkash Agriculture Farm without interest is much more in each year than the money advanced to Haryana Rice Mills. On the above facts of the case, it cannot be said that Rs. 13,500 is a taxable interest earned by the assessee for any of the years under appeal. 5. A reference has been made to some observations of the Tribunal in the earlier year. But this issue was not before the Tribunal for determination. Moreover every year has to be considered on its own facts because the principal of res judicata are not applicable to income-tax proceedings. Therefore these two appeals have been decided on merit taking into consideration the facts available in these two years. 6. Appeals allowed.
-
1983 (1) TMI 132 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... filed by the assessee were that of the income escaped assessment. 7. After careful consideration of the rival submissions, it appeals to me that showing G.P. at Rs. 6,969 instead of Rs. 8,204 is inadvertent because the trading account and the profit and loss account were both submitted to the ITO and it would not require any scrutiny but a mere glance at these two amounts, to come to the conclusion that the gross profit was Rs. 8,204 and not Rs. 6,969. Therefore, there could not be any intention much less the mala fide intention in doing this. No penalty could, therefore, be levied for such an omission. 8. In so far as the order amount is concerned, on the facts, it appears, the assessee did commit a mistake in not properly showing the sundry debtor but the mistake is not such that it establishes contumacious conduct of the assessee or an intention to defraud the revenue. Therefore, in my opinion, the penalty is wrongly imposed, which is cancelled. 9. The appeal is allowed.
-
1983 (1) TMI 131 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... r property has been valued by him at Rs. 1,80,100. However, the Valuation Officer of the revenue took the value of these properties respectively at Rs. 1,99,700 and Rs. 2,66,500. These values were adopted in the assessment of the assessee. The assessee went up in appeal and the AAC has reduced the value respectively to Rs. 1,89,700 and Rs. 2,16,500. 3. The assessee HUF is the lessee of the land and is the owner of the superstructure. The properties in question are rented out. The net maintainable rent in respect of the first building comes to Rs. 13,774. Similarly the net maintainable rent for the other building is Rs. 18,345.71, say Rs. 18,346. Considering the entirety of the facts of the case, we are of the opinion that the multiple of 10 would be sufficient to determine the value of the properties as on the valuation date. Since the total net maintainable rent comes to Rs. 32,120, we direct that the value of the properties be taken at Rs. 3,21,200. 4. Ordered accordingly.
-
1983 (1) TMI 130 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... find that the contentions of the learned counsel for the assessee by way of reiteration, what was stated before the AAC, are fully justified. The ITO in computing the total income of the assessee at Rs. 15,367.91 had considered the expenditure of Rs. 17,811 debited to the profit and loss account. In other words, there was application of mind about this expenditure, by the ITO at the time of original assessment. The audit has tried to advise the ITO as to what view of the expenditure he should have taken. The advice of the audit is in the nature of telling the ITO as to how the law should have been applied and the expenditure examined. In view of the Supreme Court judgment which has been cited before the AAC, this is beyond the scope of audit and since the reassessment proceedings were initiated on the basis of this report, the entire proceedings are bad in law. The orders of the authorities below are, therefore, cancelled and status quo ante restored. 7. Ordered accordingly.
-
1983 (1) TMI 129 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... e value of assets. This amount is also not retained to provide for any known or existing liability. 12. We are fortified in our judgment on the issue by the judgment of the Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of Hindustan Lever Ltd. Rightly relied on by the ld. Counsel for the assessee. Similar is the case of Glaxo Laboratories supporting the assessee. 13. With regard to ground No. 2 in the appeal of the revenue, we do not have any problem inasmuch as the issue is squarely covered by the judgment of the Hon ble Punjab and Haryana High Court cited supra. The appeal of the revenue is, therefore, dismissed. 14. Insofar as the cross objection of the assessee is concerned, it is also covered by the judgment of the Madras High Court in the case of Craigmore Land and Produce Company Ltd. Cited by the learned counsel for the assessee in his support on the entirety of the facts. We, therefore, allow the cross objection of the assessee. 15. Appeal dismissed, cross objection allowed.
-
1983 (1) TMI 128 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
Standard Deduction ... ... ... ... ..... ai 1977 106 ITR 292 has held that a firm is not a legal person even though it has some attributes of personality. In income-tax law a firm is a unit of assessment, by special provisions, but is not a full person. Since a contract of employment requires two distinct persons, viz., the employer and the employee, there cannot be a contract of service, in strict law, between a firm and one of its partners. Payment of salary to a partner represents a special share of the profits. Salary paid to a partner retains the same character of the income of the firm. 4. In view of the above position of law, relating to the salary received by a partner from a firm it is clear that standard deduction as envisaged in section 16(i) as a deduction from salaries cannot be granted because such salary cannot be brought to tax under the head Salaries as enumerated in the heads of income in section 14 of the Act. The orders of the authorities below are, therefore, not assailable. 5. Appeal dismissed.
-
1983 (1) TMI 127 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
Development Rebate At Higher Rate, Income Tax Act, Words And Phrases ... ... ... ... ..... s to item 32. Therefore, I am convinced that the interpretation to be placed on textiles including cotton yarn, hosiery and rope has to be of such amplitude as to include composite unit of hosiery out of woollen goods to entitle it to development rebate at the rate of 25 per cent. This is the case of the assessee and, therefore, it has to be allowed. 17. There is a well settled principle of law now and for this no authority need be cited that for a fiscal statute if there are two reasonable views possible in its construction, the one that favours the subject has to be adopted. If it may be said that with the arguments raised on behalf of the revenue, a doubt can be created in the interpretation of item 32 as above, even then the other reasonable view has to be adopted which favours the assessee. On this ground also, the appeal of the assessee on this issue has to be allowed. 18. In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and that of the assessee is allowed in part.
-
1983 (1) TMI 126 - ITAT CALCUTTA-E
Business Income, Business Loss, Carry Forward And Set Off, Speculation Business ... ... ... ... ..... ugh, for the purpose of computation of the income, interest on securities is separately classified, income by way of interest from securities does not cease to be part of income from business, if the securities are part of the trading assets. It was also held, whether a particular income is part of the income from a business falls to be decided not on the basis of the provisions of section 6 but on commercial principles. The facts of that decided case were similar to the facts of the case before us. 9. Having regard to the entire facts and circumstances of the case and the ratio enunciated in the case mentioned above, we are of the view that the assessee is entitled to succeed in the present appeal. We, therefore, direct that the claim of the assessee on the point should be allowed. The orders of the authorities below are set aside with the direction that the claim of the assessee as discussed above should be accepted. 10. In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed.
-
1983 (1) TMI 125 - ITAT CALCUTTA-E
Foreign Company, Indian Company, Setting Up, Technical Services ... ... ... ... ..... sion does not help the assessee. What the Tribunal had held in the aforesaid case of American Consulting Corpn. was that the undertaking of the company to meet the tax liability of the non-resident company was in the nature of a benefit or perquisite contemplated by clause (iv) of section 28 of the Act introduced by section 7 of the Finance Act, 1964 and that, for the period prior to the amendment, the benefit or perquisite was not liable to be charged to tax under the head Profits and gains of business or profession . Clause (iv) of section 28 was applicable to the assessment year under consideration and, therefore, the arguments on the basis of which the Tribunal had given relief to the American Consulting Corporation was not available to the assessee in the present case. The grossing up appears to us to be entirely justified and, accordingly, we uphold the order of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) on this point. 9. In the result, the assessee s appeal is hereby rejected.
-
1983 (1) TMI 124 - ITAT CALCUTTA-D
... ...
... ... ..... which was concealed by him on the facts stated earlier on the basis of his letter dated 21st Feb. 1976. Vide this letter the case was refixed for 27th Feb, 1976 on which dated the assessee was asked to furnish such bank account. But before that date on 24th Feb, 1976 the assessee filed the second revised return as stated. On these facts it cannot be concluded that the detection of the deposits with National and Grindlays Bank, New Delhi was made by the ITO as it was factually disclosed by the assessee in the revised return as briefly discussed above. 11. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and the decisions referred to by both the sides at the time of hearing, we are of the opinion that the order of the AAC impugned before us is quite proper and valid in law and we find no material to interfere with his order. 12. Accordingly we have no hesitation to sustain the order of the AAC. 13. In the result, the appeal by the revenue is dismissed.
............
|
