|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 121 to 140 of 219 Records
-
1990 (6) TMI 100 - ITAT DELHI-B
Business Expenditure ... ... ... ... ..... ther than the existing cinema had resulted. When the assessee is not the owner and is only a monthly tenant the principle applied by the Supreme Court in the case of Kalyanji Mavji and Co. was the most appropriate rule to be applied. I think this ruling of the Delhi High Court further re-enforces the view that I am inclined to take that by incurring the expenditure, the cc did not acquire any enduring benefit or an asset which could be called capital expenditure. 12. For the above reasons and for the reasons given by the learned Accountant Member, I agree with his view and hold that on the facts and in the circumstances of this case the expenditure of Rs. 2,55,250 cannot be said to be capital expenditure and that it represented revenue expenditure allowable as a deduction in computing, the business profits of the assessee for the assessment year 1982-83. 13. The matter will now go before the regular Bench for disposing of the appeal in accordance with the opinion of majority.
-
1990 (6) TMI 99 - ITAT DELHI-B
Accounting Year, Business Income, Expenditure Incurred, Expenditure On Advertisement ... ... ... ... ..... e, the assessee has properly exercised that discretion and it cannot be quarrelled with. The ratio of Odhams Press Ltd. v. Cook 1941 9 ITR 92 (Suppl.)(HL), relied by Shri Rajendra, has no application to the facts of the present case. That was a case in which the assessee claimed the business loss of a subsidiary company as its own loss or expenditure. In the case before us it is not so. The assessee is merely claiming deduction for an expenditure incurred by it through an agent, i.e., the bottlers. 20. For the above reasons we hold that the expenditure of Rs. 21,53,788 incurred by the assessee by way of reimbursing the advertising expenditure incurred by the bottlers in pursuance of the agreement in question was an expenditure laid out by the assessee wholly and exclusively for the purposes of its business and was to be allowed in computing the business income of the assessee. The disallowance was, therefore, improper and is hereby deleted. 21. In the result appeal is allowed
-
1990 (6) TMI 98 - ITAT DELHI-A
Agricultural Income ... ... ... ... ..... rofits or gains arising on the sale of agricultural land would be agricultural income. Since the revenue derived from land is not to include any income arising from the transfer of any land, the capital gains arising from the transfer of the land in question is not any mor eacute to be treated as revenue derived from land and, therefore, as agricultural income. Since this is given retrospective effect from 1-4-1970 which covers the assessment year in question before me, it must be held that the capital gains wising on the sale of the agricultural land is capital gain and not agricultural income and, therefore, the view expressed by the learned Accountant Member has to be accepted as correct in law. I, therefore, agree with his view and hold that the profit on the sale of agricultural land in question was chargeable to capital gains in the relevant assessment year. 7. The matter will now go before the regular Bench for disposing of the appeal according to the majority opinion.
-
1990 (6) TMI 97 - ITAT DELHI-A
Assessment Order, Foreign Company, Orders Prejudicial To Interests ... ... ... ... ..... missioner does not appear to have served any interest of the revenue. For the reasons discussed above, we are of the opinion that the assessment in the case of Mecdermott International Inc. could not be said to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of revenue and, therefore, the impugned order passed by the Commissioner under section 263 was unjustified and is hereby vacated. 19. As regards Appeal Nos. 3412, 3405, 3326, 3360, 3362 and 3361 it was conceded before us by the learned counsel for the parties that the facts are identical and for the reasons discussed above, we reject the appellants applications for admission of additional grounds and hold that the assessment orders passed in the case of these assessees were not erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue and, therefore, the Commissioner was not justified in taking action u/s 263. The orders impugned in these appeals are also hereby vacated. 20. In the result, all the appeals are hereby allowed
-
1990 (6) TMI 96 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... aced reliance on judgment in the case of CIT vs. Nagri Mills Ltd. (1987) 57 CTR (Guj) 304 (1987) 166 ITR 292 (Guj). He pointed out that not only no finding was recorded but no opportunity was given to the assessee and the assessing authority proceeded on presumption of lack of bona fides. The Revenue, however, relied upon the orders below. We find that on a major issue we have set aside the assessment for fresh consideration. There is also a claim from the side of the assessee that on this issue opportunity was not given of proper hearing. Instead of determining this issue at this stage, therefore, we leave it open and such it back to the assessing authority to decide it afresh in accordance with law after he decides other issues which we have sent back to him and after taking into consideration the effect of the decisions given by us on various grounds in appeal determined supra. We order accordingly. 17. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes.
-
1990 (6) TMI 95 - ITAT CALCUTTA-C
... ...
... ... ..... pening cash balance. In our view, this ground for disallowing the payments is not justified as the assessee could not be expected to have control over the cash balance of the payees. The assessee, in our view, was justified in accepting bonafidely without verification with reference to cash book that the payees needed cash for disbursement. The authorities cited on behalf of the assessee also support the assessee s case. We do agree with the learned Departmental Representative that under s. 40A(3) the case of each payment is required to be examined. But we are unable to hold that the above was not done by the CIT(A) while deleting the impugned additions. For all the above reasons, we agree with the CIT(A) that the case of the assessee was covered under r. 6DD(j) of the IT Rules and Circular No. 220 dt. 31st May, 1977 and no disallowance under s. 40A(3) should have been made. We uphold the order of the CIT(A) on this count. 8. In the result, the Revenue s appeal is dismissed.
-
1990 (6) TMI 94 - ITAT BOMBAY-D
Central Government, Discretionary Trust, His Net Wealth, Registered Valuer, Tax Liability, Valuation Report
-
1990 (6) TMI 92 - ITAT BOMBAY-B
Income From Property ... ... ... ... ..... treated as exempt by virtue of non-fulfilment of condition of investment in specified securities as prescribed by Sec. 11(5). According to us, the line of argument/reasoning advanced by the learned Counsel for the assessee is fully fortified by the aforesaid circular No. 387 issued by the CBDT. There is nothing in Sec. 11(5) which can be interpreted to mean that if a portion of the accumulated income of the Trust is not invested in specified securities, the exemption u/s.11 of the Act which has already been granted to the trust in earlier years would be withdrawn. In this view of the matter, we are of the opinion that the trust cannot be denied exemption u/s. 11 and only its income from dividend on 12,000 shares should be brought to tax at prescribed rate because such income is not from specified securities. We would, therefore, direct the ITO to accept the assessee s contention in this regard and modify the assessments accordingly. In the result, both the appeals are allowed
-
1990 (6) TMI 91 - ITAT BOMBAY-A
Backward Area, Deductions In Respect, Industrial Undertaking, Profits And Gains ... ... ... ... ..... t such deferment of sales tax shall be deemed to have been paid in accordance with the provisions of sub-sec. (2) or sub-sec. (3) or sub-sec. (4) as exempt. Both these papers clearly go to suggest that even the CBDT had held that such deferment of sales tax, if deemed to have been paid, will not be hit by sec. 43B. With these papers on the file, we are of the opinion that the sales-tax collections amounting to Rs. 8,56,228 made under the Madhya Pradesh Deferment of Sales Tax Rules, will not be treated to be a liability or obligation to pay the amount and thus will not be hit by sec. 43B of the IT Act. We therefore hold that the order passed by the learned CIT(A) on that score is not justified and thereby is reversed and the disallowance made by the learned CIT(A) u/s. 43B is quashed. 6. Ground Nos. 4,5,6,7,8 and 9 in ITA 4912 are not pressed. Hence they are dismissed and decided against the assessee. 7. to 13. These paras are not reproduced here as they involved minor issues.
-
1990 (6) TMI 90 - ITAT BANGALORE
Carrying On Business, Export Business ... ... ... ... ..... d by blending it with various additives is not a mineral oil and that a mineral oil is only one which is extracted from the earth. Even this decision is not of much help to us. There is nothing to indicate that the word minerals is used in a narrower sense in sec. 80HHC. It appears to our minds that words minerals , mineral oil and mineral ore are used in a commercial sense in sec. 80HHC and, therefore, granite extracted from quarrying which is treated as a minor mineral under the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1969, should be taken in the same sense. We, therefore, are of the view that the term minerals should receive a general and broad-based meaning as there is nothing to indicate that a restricted or scientific meaning should be adopted. 15. In conclusion, we hold that granite is a mineral excepted from goods and merchandise in respect of which deduction under sec. 80HHC is allowable. 16. to 24. These paras are not reproduced here as they involved minor issues.
-
1990 (6) TMI 89 - ITAT AMRITSAR
Assessment Proceedings, Reassessment Proceedings, Revised Returns, Voluntary Disclosure Of Income And Wealth Ordinance
-
1990 (6) TMI 88 - ITAT ALLAHABAD-A
Bench Of Tribunal, Total Income ... ... ... ... ..... d been Rs. 92,46,300 the resultant figure will be total income of Rs. 10. Jurisdiction in such case will definitely be of SMC. It is, therefore, futile, in the existing state of law, to look at the quantum of addition. What has to be looked at is the quantum of total income. 7. Then if one has loss of Rs. 1 lac, it is never said that his total income is Rs. 1 lac what is said is that his total income is loss of Rs. 1 lac. Therefore, the argument of the assessee as above appears to us to be fallacious and we reject it. 8. Besides, as will be seen from the above discussion, what is involved in the present case is the interpretation of the statute, and further even of the assessee s view be possible, it would mean two views about the interpretation of statute. In either of these eventualities, a rectification u/s. 254(2) would not be possible, as such a mistake is not one which can be said to be apparent from record. 9. In the result, the petition of the assessee stands rejected
-
1990 (6) TMI 87 - ITAT ALLAHABAD-A
Export Business ... ... ... ... ..... penses have been incurred by the company and there is no evidence to show that there is personal user of the cars in question otherwise than for company s business. The whole thing is so inter-mixed in a big organisation that it is difficult to hold on an averment like the one above that concealment of income has been done by the assessee or inaccurate particulars have been filed by the assessee. Every addition does not lead to imposition of penalty. For sustaining penalty, there must be more firm and solid footing, as has been found by us above with regard to the additions on account of low yield. The facts regarding the above additions are not of this category and, therefore, we feel that the imposition of penalty with regard to these items was not justified. As regards the item of Stores, the assessee did not press it. Therefore, we will uphold the imposition of penalty with regard to this item. Subject to the above observations, the assessee s appeal stands partly allowed
-
1990 (6) TMI 86 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-C
... ...
... ... ..... meaning than the term goods . Since the building constructed by the assessee is not included in the list specified in the XIth schedule, the business of construction of building carried out by the assessee can be said to be manufacture or production of an article or thing for the purposes of grant of investment allowance under s. 32A. This view is fortified by the decision of ITAT in the case of Walaiti Ram Gupta and Co. vs. ITO (1990) 33 ITD 544 (Del). 7. In view of aforesaid discussions, we are of the considered opinion that the assessee is clearly entitled to grant of investment allowance and additional depreciation on the items of plant and machinery purchase by the assessee during the year under consideration and the orders passed by the ITO cannot be treated as erroneous or prejudicial to the interest of revenue. We, therefore, set aside the order passed by the CIT under s. 263 for both the years under consideration. 8. In the result the assessee s appeals are allowed.
-
1990 (6) TMI 85 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-B
... ...
... ... ..... Third Member in deciding the issue opined that the amended provisions of s. 80 would be applicable w.e.f. 1st April, 1985 and not the earlier assessment year. It was further held that the observations of the Supreme Court in the case of Brij Mohan would also not be applicable since they were made in the context of levy of penalty. It was further recorded in the same decision that the provisions of 1961 Act were in Pari materia with the provisions of the 1922 Act. The aforesaid decision of the Tribunal also considered the judgments of various High Courts these being the same as relied upon by the assessee s counsel in the course of his arguments. Then again most of the judgments pertained to the post 1970 amendment period and it can safely be presumed that the amendment had been taken into account. 10. In the final analysis we accept the assessee s appeal and direct the ITO to carry forward the loss for adjustment in the subsequent assessment years. 11. The appeal is allowed.
-
1990 (6) TMI 84 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-A
Charitable Or Religious Trust, Charitable Purpose ... ... ... ... ..... (x) of Rule (4) would not, in our opinion, frustrate the charitable object of the assessee institution. The contention of the ld. D.R. based on Rule 4(x) is, therefore, rejected. 27. For the reasons discussed above and particularly keeping in view the various judicial pronouncements on the issue considered by us as above, we hold that the assessee is entitled to the claim of exemption under section 11 of the I.T. Act. Various other grounds contained in the grounds of appeal for the assessment years under reference have not been argued by the ld. Counsel for the assessee and these grounds were not pressed for our adjudication. We would, accordingly, hold that the assessee Association is a charitable institution under section 11(1) of the I.T. Act and would be entitled to exemption if the other conditions regarding application of income as per the provisions of sections 11 to 13 are satisfied in the instant case. With these observations, all the appeals art, allowed pro tanto.
-
1990 (6) TMI 83 - ITAT AHMEDABAD
... ...
... ... ..... n joining Vandana Silk Mills as a partner and the reduction in the rate of interest. 6. Although the overall rate of interest from Vandana Silk Mills is higher than the rate of interest paid by the assessee, the fact remains that the rate of interest after Taraben joined Vandana has been reduced. It is, of course, true that the ITO cannot what rate of interest should be charged and the assessee is free to charge such rate of interest as it chooses, that cannot be done at the cost of the Revenue. This is a clear attempt to divert the income from the assessee-firm to Vandana Silk Mills under the guise of the assessee s right to charge any interest that it chooses. That freedom stops where the device begins. I am, therefore, of the view that the interest difference has been rightly added by the ITO who is concerned only with the interest of the Revenue and not with the freedom of the assessee for charging interest. The ITO s order is, therefore, restored. The appeal is allowed.
-
1990 (6) TMI 82 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI-LB
Paper and board
... ... ... ... ..... salient facts and data the Ministry of Industry had issued a certificate of registration for 2000 M.T. annual capacity. According to the Ministry of Industry s D.O. letter, in the normal course, the installed capacity of a mill should be taken as equivalent the capacity recognised by Government by way of industrial licence or registration. Having regard to these considerations, in my opinion, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the installed capacity of the respondents unit for the purpose of Notification No. 128/77 dated 18-6-1977 should be held as not exceeding 2000 M.T. on the basis of the evidence produced by the respondents. 21. The point of difference is answered accordingly. These papers may now be placed before the Special Bench C for passing final orders on the appeal. 22. In accordance with the opinion of the majority we hold that the installed capacity of the respondent unit is held as not exceeding 2000 metric tonnes. Appeal is therefore dismissed.
-
1990 (6) TMI 81 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Refund - Unjust enrichment ... ... ... ... ..... timate consumers. There is no dispute between the petitioners and AGIL and AGIL have not laid their claim in the present petition for refund of the excess excise duty charged by the respondents. AGIL however reserves its rights to raise the claim against the petitioners if so advised. Consequently, the petitioners are held to be entitled to the refund of the excess excise duty collected by the respondents. 5. Pursuant to my order dated 17th January, 1990 the respondents have deposited in Court a sum of Rs. 1,25,34,988.97 P. (one crore twenty-five lakhs thirty four thousand nine hundred eighty-eight and paise ninety seven only) and the same has been invested in fixed deposit in a nationalised bank. The petitioners will be entitled to the said amount alongwith the interest accrued thereon. 6. Rule is made absolute in the above terms. In view of the facts and circumstances of this case, there shall be no order as to costs. The Prothonotary to act upon the minutes of this order.
-
1990 (6) TMI 80 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Detention order ... ... ... ... ..... through the affidavit in reply and in particular paragraphs 5, 6 and 7 and we are satisfied that the delay sought to be explained by the detaining authority is nothing but a whitewash and such explanation can hardly be accepted in cases where preventive orders are sought to be issued on the footing that the detaining authority was subjectively satisfied that the detenu is likely to indulge in prejudicial activities under the COFEPOSA Act and with a view to preventing him the detention order must be issued. In our opinion the delay in issuing the detention order in the present case must vitiate the subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority as regards the preventive action sought to be taken against the detenu. In the result petition succeeds. Rule is made absolute. The impugned order of detention dated 22nd February 1990 passed against the detenu is quashed and set aside. The detenu be set at liberty forthwith, if not required in any other case. No order as to costs.
....
|
