|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 121 to 140 of 236 Records
-
1981 (1) TMI 116 - ITAT CALCUTTA-B
... ...
... ... ..... mands arose as a result of the assessments made by the ST Authorities who rejected the books of the assessee. Therefore, these demands did not arise when sales took place but later when the assessments were made. Since these assessments were made and demand notices served on the assessee in the previous year for the asst. yrs. 1977-78 we hold that the order of the CIT(A) does not require any interference. Similarly, we see no reason to disagree with the decision of the CIT (A) regarding the remission allowed by the assessee to its customers on 1st April, 1976. 4. Coming to the cross objection, we find that the assessment for the year 1970-71 was made on 25th March, 1973 itself. The fact that it was set aside and the reassessment was made later on does not in any way affect the liability which arose on 25th March, 1973 itself. We, therefore, uphold the decision of the ld. CIT (A). 5. In the result, both the departmental appeal and the assessee s cross objection are dismissed.
-
1981 (1) TMI 115 - ITAT CALCUTTA-B
... ...
... ... ..... The assessee is now in appeal before us. 2. The learned representative for the assessee repeated the arguments advanced before the CIT (A) and, in particular, the decisions of the Allahabad High Court referred to supra. We have gone through these decisions and find that the proposition laid down in these cases is that the interest paid to the minors is not includible in the hands of the parent if such interest is paid on deposits and has nothing to do with their admission to the benefits of the partnerships. We find that the learned CIT (A) has applied himself to this question and come to the conclusion that the moneys standing to the credit of the minors in the firms did not represent deposits but capital contribution and accumulation of profits. We, therefore, agree with the decision of the learned CIT (A) that s. 64(1)(iii) has rightly been applied by the ITO. The order of the CIT (A) is accordingly upheld. 3. The appeal by the assessee thus fails and is hereby dismissed.
-
1981 (1) TMI 114 - ITAT CALCUTTA-B
... ...
... ... ..... one property was subject matter of valuation in the case of several co owners effort should be to avoid any conflicting valuation in different cases. It is true that the technically in the present case a reference had not been made to the Valuation Officer and his report in the case of Atul Kumar Garg was adopted. However, apart from technicalities the ultimate question is regarding the valuation of the property in question. It would therefore be proper that the question of valuation in this case is finally determined along with the appeal in th case of Atul Kumaar Garg. The AAC would determine all the issues involved in the present appeal after hearing the Valuation Officer in that case and after also hearing the arguments of the assessee. As the order of the AAC is being set aside with the above directions it is not necessary for us to go into the various aspects of the ground raised in the present appeal 5. For statistical purposes the appeal shall be treated as allowed.
-
1981 (1) TMI 113 - ITAT CALCUTTA-B
... ...
... ... ..... , he added Rs. 5,000 representing the market value of jewellery and cash with the assessee. The basis of the best judgment assessment by the WTO in determining the net wealth of the assessee for each of the years under consideration is the assessment made by him of the assessee for the asst. yr. 1964-65. As such, it cannot be said that the said assessment is bad, there being no basis for arriving at the net wealth of the assessee for each of the years under consideration. Further, the material now sought to be produced was never before the tax authorities. Since the assessee has not produced all the Awards and has produced only one of them before us, it would not be correct to say that the value of the house properties bearing Nos. 92/3, 92/4, 92/10 and 92/11 determined by the WTO in the assessments of Rs. 36,208 is not correct. We, therefore, uphold the best judgment assessment in the present case. 6. In the result, the appeals by the assessee fail and are hereby dismissed.
-
1981 (1) TMI 112 - ITAT CALCUTTA-B
... ...
... ... ..... to 1970-71. 7. This takes us to s. 2(42A) of the Act, which defines shorts term capital asset to mean a capital asset held by an assessee for the more than 60 months immediately preceding the date of its transfer. As already stated above the assessee-HUF had sold the Diamonds in question in the year under consideration on 20th February, 1976 and 29th March 1976. As held in the preceding paragraph, these loose Diamonds were acquired by the assessee during the accounting periods relevant to the asst. yrs. 1966-67 to 1970-71 ending 30th March, 1970 and not 3oth March, 1971, as held by the CIT (A). That being the position, the said loose Diamonds are not short term capital assets , as defined in s. 2(42A) of the Act. This, in turn, means that the capital gain in the present case is long term and not short term capital gain. We, therefore, direct the ITO to allow statutory deduction to the assessee under s. 80T of the Act. 8. In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed.
-
1981 (1) TMI 111 - ITAT CALCUTTA-B
... ...
... ... ..... atio of the decision of the Supreme Court in S. Srinivasan vs. CIT. Therein, it has been held that the interest on the accumulated shares of the profits of the minors and spouse over a period of years which was included in the capital balance was caught within the, mischief of cls. (i) and (ii) of s. 16(3)(a) of the Indian IT Act, 1922, because the interest on such capital balance was held to be atleast income arising indirectly to the minor from his admission to the benefits of the partnership. The Supreme Court has further laid down that cases, where interest is earned on a deposit or a loan which is distinct from the accumulated balance differs from the cases where the interest is earned on the accumulated capital balance. Same is the ratio of the other decision of Punjab and Haryana and Allahabad High Courts relied upon by the AAC. We, therefore, uphold the order of the AAC on the point at issue. 6. In the result, the appeal by the assessee fails and is hereby dismissed.
-
1981 (1) TMI 110 - ITAT CALCUTTA-B
... ...
... ... ..... ated into the fact whether those sales at low rates were sham transactions or genuine sales. This aspect had substantially effected the profit shown by the assessee and therefore the CIT (A) was perfectly justified in directing the ITO to look into the matter. If the ITO after enquiries and found satisfactory answer to the enquiries and found that the transactions were genuine, the low gross profit would be explained to a substantial extent. We are therefore of the view that the CIT (A) was justified in setting aside the assessment and directing the ITO to look to the whole matter afresh. We may however clarify it that the ITO will have to give his own independent conclusion by ascertaining full facts and he should not find himself bound by any finding of fact given by the CIT (A). He should ascertain the facts himself and then come to a definite conclusion on the point under issue. 5. Subject to those observations the order of the CIT (A) is upheld. The appeal is dismissed.
-
1981 (1) TMI 109 - ITAT CALCUTTA-B
... ...
... ... ..... he basis of the report of the Valuation Officer. The valuation appears to have been done in the case of Naresh Kumar another partner and no separate opportunity was given to the assessee in this regard. Even if it is accepted that the ultimate assessable wealth is as per the order of the WTO it does not mean that the assessee could work out his interest in the firms in accordance with the rules after revaluing the different assets belonging to the firm. If the impression of the assessee that his wealth was below the taxable limit was based on a bona fide belief no penalty under s. 18(1)(a) should be imposed as his bona fide belief would be a reasonable cause for the delay in the filing of the returns. Under similar circumstances the department has dropped penalty proceedings for the asst. yr. 1973-74. We therefore hold that no penalty under s. 18(1)(a) should have been imposed for any of the three years. The penalty orders are therefore cancelled. 8. The appeals are allowed.
-
1981 (1) TMI 108 - ITAT CALCUTTA-B
... ...
... ... ..... such debts should not be claimed. When the assessee claimed such a debt as deduction without mentioning the relevant fact that is was secured against exempt assets, it accounted to non-disclosure of relevant materials for the purpose of assessment. We are, therefore, of the view that the WTO was entitled to reopen the assessment under s. 17(1)(a) of these facts. 7. As far as the order of the Tribunal relied upon by the assessee is concerned, we find that before the Tribunal and third party of the note has not been properly placed and the order of the Tribunal lays stress on the earlier part of the note. These debts were not incurred for acquiring assets which are exempt from wealth-tax, but were certainly secured for repayment on LIC policy which was an exempt asset. We are, therefore, of the view that the AAC erred in holding that the reassessment proceedings were bad in law. We hold that the action under s. 17(1)(a) was justified. 8. In the result, the appeals are allowed.
-
1981 (1) TMI 107 - ITAT CALCUTTA-B
... ...
... ... ..... itted that the assessee HUF was under the impression that half of the income from No. 365 Harishganj being shown by D.P. Kanodia and the other half by Sri B.N. Kanodia no part of the income belonged to the assessee himself. Even if this position had not been accepted by the Department, it could not result in the conclusion that there has been any concealment of income. 6. We have considered the facts of the case and we are of the view that the AAC rightly cancelled the penalty. There was a dispute by the assessee regarding this income and the question to be decided was whether any part of this income had to be included in the income of the assessee when the whole of that income had been included in the hands of other assessees. In such circumstances, the non-disclosure of the property income could not be considered to be a concealment of income. The AAC was, therefore, right in cancelling the penalty under s. 271(1)(c). 7. In the result, the Departmental appeal is dismissed.
-
1981 (1) TMI 106 - ITAT CALCUTTA-B
... ...
... ... ..... was due to the fact that the WTO in his show cause letters had not pin-pointed to this item in respect of which he was proceeding to impose penalty. From the value taken by the WTO it appears that the major portion of jewellery contained of precious stones and a not gold. The valuation of precious stones is a question of opinion about which there can be a difference. As the assessee disclosed jewellery with the remark that as per details shown in the earlier years it could not be with any intention to pay lower tax which was very nominal. Though there is a mention in the orders of the authorities below that there was some slight difference in the weight of jewellery, no specific items were pointed out before us and it cannot be held that any item of jewellery has been left out by the assessee. 11. We are, therefore, of the view that this was not a fit case for imposition of penalty under s. 18(1)(c). The penalty orders are, therefore, cancelled. 12. The appeals are allowed.
-
1981 (1) TMI 105 - ITAT CALCUTTA-B
... ...
... ... ..... provision undoubtedly supported the contention of the department, but in considering the claim for such a deduction the court must look to the substance of the transaction and the purpose underlying s. 88(1) (now sec. 80G). For these observations the Mysore High Court relied on the decision of the Bombay High Court in Associated Cement Company s case (1968) 68 ITR 478 (Bom). In the source of the judgment, it was observed that the decision in Associated Cement Company s case has held the field all these years and the department did not take up the matter in appeal to the Supreme Court. In this view of the matter, we are of the opinion that the assessee cannot be denied the benefit of s. 80G of the Act, because the shares donated were in kind and not in cash, more so when those shares constitute stock-in-trade of the assessee and in fact the donation in kind is nothing but donation in cash value of those shares donated. 8. In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed.
-
1981 (1) TMI 104 - ITAT CALCUTTA-B
... ...
... ... ..... is no evidence on the record to prove the extent of the expenditure incurred either on entertainment of the customers or on the welfare of the staff. There is no denying fact that the expenditure incurred by the assessee on entertainment of the customers is not allowable in view of the decision of the Allahabad High Court in Brij Raman Das and Sons vs. CIT 1975 CTR (All) 223 (1976) 104 ITR 541 (All). Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and the past history, we restrict the disallowance to Rs. 1,000. The earlier decision of the Tribunal (Allahabad Bench- B ) in the case of the assessee for the asst. yr. 1973-74 in ITA Nos. 117 and 50/Alld/1978-79, decided on 31st Oct., 1980 in this behalf is distinguishable, because in that decision, the Tribunal had recorded a finding of fact that the entire expenditure was incurred on entertainment of the staff and not on the entertainment of the customers. 9. In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed.
-
1981 (1) TMI 103 - ITAT CALCUTTA-A
... ...
... ... ..... yrs. 1968 - 69 and onwards, the penalties should be on the basis of the law in force from 1st April, 1968 as admittedly for these years the returns were filed after that date. The minimum penalty leviable will be equivalent to the amount in respect of which there is concealment. The ITO will also impose minimum penalties. We, therefore,, uphold the penalties for the asst. yrs. 1968-69, 1969-70 and 1970-71 to the extent of Rs. 22, 193, Rs. 1,932 and Rs. 1,862 respectively. 19. In the result, the penalties for the asst. yr. 1966-67 and 1967-68 are reduced and the ITO is directed to recompute minimum penalties as indicated above. The penalties for the asst.yrs.1968- 69 and 1969-70 are reduced. Penalty for the asst. yr. 1970-71 is confirmed. The appeals of the assessee as well as the Revenue for the asst. yrs. 1966-67, 1967- 68, 1968-69 and 1969-70 are treated as allowed in part. The appeal of the Revenue for the asst. yr. 1970-71 is allowed and that of the assessee is dismissed.
-
1981 (1) TMI 102 - ITAT CALCUTTA-A
... ...
... ... ..... e can make are enumerated in cl. (b) of s. 143(1). The estimate of Agrl. Income is completely outside the purview of sub-cl.(b). What the ITO did in this case is outside the provisions of s.143(1). Consequently the assessee is entitled to point out the mistake committed by the ITO which is apparent from the record. Sec. 143(2)(a) will be applicable only in a case where an assessment is made under s. 143(1) in accordance with the that provision. If the ITO travels beyond that provision, the assessee has certainly an option to move as application under s. 154. 4. For the foregoing reasons, we hold that the assessment has to be rectified in substituting the income from agriculture as returned by the assessee in the assessment under s. 143(1). It is needless to point out that the ITO is free to adopt such course as he deems fit for assessing the income if in his opinion Agrl. income returned by the assessee is not correct. Subject to the above observation, the appeal is allowed.
-
1981 (1) TMI 101 - ITAT CALCUTTA-A
... ...
... ... ..... second item representing the estimated addition on account of low withdrawals for domestic expenses there is no material to show that it was concealed income and although such addition was sustained by the Tribunal it would not justify the guilt of concealment of particulars of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income inasmuch as it is only based on estimate without any material. It is well-settled that the material which is relevant for the purpose of assessment would not be sufficient for levying penalty for concealment of income inasmuch as penalty for the concealment being quasi criminal in nature, the element of animus or conscious disregard or contumacious conduct has to be established before levying of penalty. Viewed form this angle, we hold that there is no justification for levying penalty for concealment of income and, therefore, the order of the AAC is not justified in the fact and circumstances of the case. 10. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1981 (1) TMI 100 - ITAT CALCUTTA
... ...
... ... ..... hese penalty orders were cancelled by the AAC. This indicated the said bonafide belief of the assessee. The present case is, therefore, a case where the assessee was under the bona fide belief that the concessional value of the electricity provided to the employees and/or the bungalow maintenance allowance provided by it to its employees was not to be included in the salary of the employees concerned for the purposes of calculating the tax to be deducted at the source. Penalty is, therefore, not exigible against the assessee in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Hindustan Steel Ltd. vs. State of Orissa(1972)83 ITR 26 (SC). Penalty is, therefore, not exigible against the assessee under s. 201 of the Act. 7. Having come to the above conclusion, we need not express our views on the other arguments raised by the parties before us. 8. In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed. Penalty amount if already paid by the assessee shall be refunded to it.
-
1981 (1) TMI 99 - ITAT CALCUTTA
... ...
... ... ..... to. We hold likewise. 8.Even otherwise, on going through the material on record, we are satisfied, as has been held by the tax authorities in the assessment order and the quantum appeal, with which we agree that the alleged purchase of Rs. 15,673 shown by the assessee in the books to have been made from M/s. Aradhana Rubber Stores are bogus purchases, the said purchases having been not made at all. The statement of Sri Jamir Ahmed, the so-called proprietor of M/s. Aradhana Rubber Stores is not worth the paper, on which it was recorded. In this behalf, we agree with the tax authorities in to. As such, the present case is a clear case of fraudulent purchases, when, in fact, there were no purchases at all. The penalty is also exigible against the assessee even on that score, in view of the ratio of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of D. M. Manavi vs. CIT 1972 CTR (SC)437 (1972)86 ITR 557(SC). We hold likewise. 9. In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is allowed.
-
1981 (1) TMI 98 - ITAT CALCUTTA
... ...
... ... ..... r Lordships have observed that an instrument of the partnership has to be reasonably construed in the background of general law and when so construed with reference to the facts of reference Nos. 510 of 1974. The minor in the present case was not to share the loss, if any, of the assessee firm and on a reasonable construction of the clause reproduced in para 2 above, it has to be held that the entire losses, if any of the assessee firm were to be shared by the two partners named above in the proportion of 40 per cent 30 per cent. The question of partnership deed being invalid did not arise. 10. We, therefore, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and the above discussions, hold that the AAC was correct in holding that the assessee firm was entitled to the registration for the first year. That being the position, it was also entitled to the continuation of registration for the second year. 11.In the result, the appeals by the revenue fall and are hereby dismissed.
-
1981 (1) TMI 97 - ITAT CALCUTTA
... ...
... ... ..... nd served will not, therefore, be of much assistance to us. We have to take notice of the fact that the word forward is used in contradistinction with the words issued and served . The dictionary meaning of the word is to help on to send on . It, therefore, denotes a stage when a document is ready for dispatch. Thus, when the ITO prepares a draft order and signs the forwarding letter , we have to take it that the draft assessment order is forwarded on the date the ITO signs the said letter. He hands it over to the clerk who in turn despatches it to the assessee either through post or through messenger. It cannot be said that the process of forwarding is the same as service. When the ITO signs th covering letter to which the draft assessment order is enclosed he sets in motion the process of service of the order etc., on the assessee. We, therefore, agree with the learned CIT (A) and upheld his order in this behalf. 5. The appeal by the assessee fails and is hereby dismissed.
............
|
