|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 141 to 160 of 288 Records
-
1990 (10) TMI 148 - ITAT GAUHATI
Assessment Order, Assessment Proceedings ... ... ... ... ..... tion 139(4) was justified. 9. In the instant case, the first AAC vide order dated 25-2-1982 had directed the WTO to exclude the assets as well as liabilities of late R.G. Saharia. As mentioned, that order of the predecessor AAC was not challenged. In such a situation, we are of the opinion that the present AAC was justified in holding the view as he has done and as stated by is in the preceding paragraphs. 10. It may be that the Appellate Tribunal in some collateral proceedings have taken a particular view which might be valid or might be in favour of either of the parties, but since the issue was never raised nor dealt with in the order of the first appellate authority who passed the original order, the same cannot be revived at a later stage, as in the present case. In the circumstances, the appeal by the assessee on this point cannot be accepted and is, therefore, rejected. 11. There is no other ground raised for our adjudication. 12. In the result, the appeal is dismissed
-
1990 (10) TMI 147 - ITAT DELHI-E
... ...
... ... ..... eptional circumstances as prescribed in r. 6-DDJ would be applicable. The action of the CIT(A) is, accordingly, confirmed. 11. This disposes of the common issues in all the three appeals. 12. The other issue for asst. yr. 1979-80 relates to the disallowance of the depreciation of car for personal use which was pleaded as not justified when the rate of margin has been applied. This plea of the assessee cannot be said to be justified in the circumstances of the case. This argument of the assessee is not tenable in view of the fact that the starting point as provided by the Assessing Officer was the arriving at the margin of profit before allowing of depreciation as per rules. Therefore, once the assessee has been allowed depreciation on the car, to the extent of depreciation not relatable to the business necessarily has to be disallowed. We confirm the order of the CIT(A) on this issue. 13. In the result, the appeals of the assessee as well as that of the Revenue are dismissed.
-
1990 (10) TMI 146 - ITAT DELHI-D
... ...
... ... ..... d challenging initiation of proceedings under s. 148 was not pressed at the time of hearing and is accordingly treated as dismissed. 18. As regards ground No. 2, the clubbing of income of minor sons amounting to Rs. 70,804 and Rs. 44,726 is held justified for the reasons mentioned by us in our order for asst. yr. 1977-78. This ground, therefore, fails. 19. The last ground is with regard to the levy of interest under s. 139(8). For the reasons mentioned by us in our order for asst. yr. 1977-78 the Assessing Officer is directed to delete the interest charged under s. 139(8). 20. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part. ITA No. 6367 (Del) of 1987 (Asst. yr. 1983-84) 21. The only ground taken in this appeal is with regard to the charging of interest under ss. 139(8) and 215 of the IT Act. At the time of hearing, the learned counsel for the assessee, did not press the ground which is accordingly treated as dismissed. 22. In the result, the appeal is dismissed, as not pressed.
-
1990 (10) TMI 145 - ITAT DELHI-D
Bonus Shares, Capital Asset, Held By Assessee, Long-term Capital Gains ... ... ... ... ..... the profits resulting from such sale would be long-term capital gains. We hold accordingly. 14. The learned counsel further submitted that the assessee HUF had 100 shares of M/s. Gupta Trading Corpn. (India) Pvt. Ltd., up to20-12-1978. On20-1-1983, 60 bonus shares were issued by the company. All these 160 shares were also sold on29-5-1985. The capital gains in respect of 100 shares was taken as long-term capital gains by the assessing officer as claimed by the assessee. As regards 60 bonus shares, since these were issued on20-1-1983and were sold on29-5-1985, the assessing officer assessed profit accruing from the sale of these shares as short-term capital gains. We do not see any error or infirmity in the order of the assessing officer in this regard. We, therefore, reject the submission of Shri Sood that sale of 60 bonus shares should give rise to long-tem capital gains and not short-term capital gains. 15. In the result, the appeal is allowed, to the extent indicated above
-
1990 (10) TMI 144 - ITAT DELHI-C
... ...
... ... ..... (A) was, therefore, justified in accepting the assessee s contention that the machineries did not require any formal installation and that they could just be plugged in and used. Once it is found that these machineries did not require any formal installation, the assessee s contention becomes quite acceptable. The assessee spent considerable amount on purchasing the machineries. It, therefore, does not stand to reason that the assessee after having purchased the machineries would not use them, even though they could be used just by plugging in. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, we are, therefore, inclined to agree with the finding of the CIT(A) and hold that the machineries were in use after they had been purchased till the end of the accounting year. The assessee s claim for depreciation and investment allowance was, therefore, rightly allowed by the CIT(A). 38. In view of what has been said above, the appeal is allowed partly to the extent indicated above.
-
1990 (10) TMI 143 - ITAT DELHI-C
Accounting Year, Excise Duty, Show-cause Notice, Trading Liability ... ... ... ... ..... allowance or deduction either expressly or impliedly in any of the year in respect of the excise duty refund of Rs. 98,607. If it is found that the amount has been allowed as a deduction in any of the years then the amount of refund is assessable in the year of receipt, i.e., the year in appeal. However, if allowance or deduction has not been allowed in any year either expressly or impliedly for any reason whatsoever, the refund received by the assessee would not be assessable u/s 41 as the basic condition for attracting the provisions of section 41 would be absent. 15. Since we have remitted the main issue to the file of CIT(A) we also direct him to consider the disallowances in respect of telephone expenses, car expenses, car depreciation, Rs. 7,500 fee paid to counsel and Rs. 6,127 as income from house property afresh. Consequential relief, if permissible in respect of interest charged u/s 217 may also be allowed. 16. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed
-
1990 (10) TMI 142 - ITAT DELHI-C
Advance Tax, Appellate Assistant Commissioner, Assessing Officer, Interest Payable By Assessee, Late Filing
-
1990 (10) TMI 141 - ITAT DELHI-C
Tax At Source, Tax Deducted At Source ... ... ... ... ..... d returns on behalf of the non-resident company. Assessments have been framed and appeals are pending. Therefore, the question of tax liability of the foreign company has now to be determined in those appeals and in the present appeals which are directed against an order under section 195(2) no order for refund of the tax already deposited can be made. As pointed out by the learned Departmental Representative the validity of the order under section 195(2) has to be seen according to the circumstances and facts as they prevailed on6-8-1983. Up to that time there was no order under section 163 and, therefore, when the order was passed it was perfectly valid. The assessee complied with it without raising the legal controversy that it now has raised and in such circumstances, according to him, no relief can be granted to the assessee. We are in agreement with this argument and for the reasons discussed above, we find no force in the present appeal and the same is hereby dismissed
-
1990 (10) TMI 140 - ITAT DELHI-C
Account Books, Assessment Proceedings, Being Heard, Excise Duty ... ... ... ... ..... was taking the plea that there were unrecorded/unaccounted purchases. This sentence is thus factually incorrect as no such plea was made. It was only submitted that the large cash balances indicate that these purchases may have in the short run been financed through these cash balances. This sentence may, it is pleaded, be suitably amended in the light of the assessee plea noted in the other parts of the order. Even the assessee s present explanation that large cash balances indicate that these purchases may have, in the short run, been financed through these cash balances shows that what the Tribunal has recorded was the submission of the assessee at the time of hearing and has been correctly recorded. We do not find any contradiction in what has been recorded in the Tribunal s order and what has been stared by the assessee in the present application. 16. For the reasons discussed above all the three applications under section 254(2) moved by the assessee are hereby rejected
-
1990 (10) TMI 139 - ITAT DELHI-C
Assessed Income, Assessing Officer, Financial Year, Income From House Property, Income From Other Sources, Orders Prejudicial To Interests, Original Assessment, Original Order, Previous Year
-
1990 (10) TMI 138 - ITAT DELHI-B
Carry Forward, Previous Year ... ... ... ... ..... usiness. Thereafter, the assessee had collected export incentives which is at par with the collection of the outstandings in Lahore Electric Supply Co. Ltd. s case. 12. Under these circumstances, we are satisfied that the assessee had stopped business. They are, therefore, not entitled to the carry forward of the losses. 13. With regard to the expenditure allowed, Shri Sampat submitted that there was no basis for allowing just 10 of the receipts. We agree that there is really no basis for merely allowing 10 . The ITO has to allow some further deductions. After all, the company must exist to receive the cash incentive and those expenses which are necessary to keep up the corporate entity, must be allowed as a deduction. Thus, we would agree that the assessee should be allowed the deduction in respect of the salaries, audit fees, printing and stationery and bank charges, postages and telegrams. The ITO is directed to work out the relief accordingly. The appeal is partly allowed
-
1990 (10) TMI 137 - ITAT DELHI-B
Appellate Assistant Commissioner, Appellate Authority, Assessment Order, Dispose Of, Reference To Valuation Officer
-
1990 (10) TMI 136 - ITAT DELHI-A
... ...
... ... ..... also and admit the claim of the assessee. This issue is also sent back to the file of the ITO for deciding afresh after giving an opportunity to the assessee. 18. Regarding ground No. 1(ii) of the Revenue for the asst. yr. 1981-82 that the CIT(A) has worked out the assessee s income at Rs. 25,07,761 as against Rs. 20,55,820 worked out by the Assessing Officer without appreciating that the depreciation for a sum of Rs. 1,61,328 was added for separate consideration and actually a sum of Rs. 39,865 was allowed and other ground of the Revenue regarding computation of income made by the CIT(A) for the asst. yr. 1983--84, and revised Profit and Loss Account, we are of the opinion that since the entire matter is inter-related and is sent back for decision afresh by the ITO, therefore, no more discussion is required on these issues raised by the Department in these years. 19. In the result, the appeals of the assessee as well as of the Department are allowed for statistical purposes.
-
1990 (10) TMI 135 - ITAT DELHI-A
Investment Allowance, Orders Prejudicial To Interests ... ... ... ... ..... trade is commonly carried on. This case nor the tests referred to therein do not determine the issue before us. What was let out in the case before the Supreme Court was a building fitted with furniture and fixtures for the purpose of running a hotel, whereas, in the case before us what was leased out was only a Computer which is nothing but a commercial asset used for commercial exploitation as mentioned by the Supreme Court in the observation extracted above. Therefore, nothing turns upon the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Sultan Bros. (P.) Ltd. 8. For the above reasons, we are of the opinion that the order passed by the Income-tax Officer was neither erroneous nor did it cause any prejudice to the interests of the revenue. The Commissioner of Income-tax was, therefore, not justified in interfering with that order under section 263 of the Income-tax Act. We, therefore, allow the assessee s appeal and set aside the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax
-
1990 (10) TMI 134 - ITAT DELHI-A
Closing Stock, Work In Progress ... ... ... ... ..... fer that because of the variations in the closing stock, he determined to fix the income at Rs. 1,50,000. If that were so, as we have already pointed out earlier, the difference in the closing stock was more conjectural than real. We cannot, therefore, go by that standard if at all that was acting on the mind of the ITO as submitted before us by the learned D.R. for fixing the income at Rs. 1,50,000. Therefore, the estimate made by the ITO cannot be sustained or supported. Now the learned CIT felt that in view of the past accepted history and reasonableness of the rate of gross profit shown this year, even though the method of accounting employed by the assessee could not be said to be satisfactory, the book results could be accepted. We are inclined to agree with this view. We, therefore, confirm the view taken by the learned CIT and dismiss this appeal. It is to be noted that no other defect was pointed out by the ITO in his assessment order other than those discussed above
-
1990 (10) TMI 133 - ITAT DELHI-A
Income From House Property, Let Out, Previous Year ... ... ... ... ..... d the income from the property has to be estimated on notional basis even if the property is in a state of disrepair. Thus the law is that Section 22 of the Income-tax Act will apply only to a building as mentioned earlier which was used to be let out as building and not to a building which is to be used as a business asset, i.e., for the purpose of commercial exploitation. On the facts of this case and for the reasons given by the CIT(Appeals) in his order, we are satisfied that this is a building meant to be commercially exploited. It is this reason that prevailed with us in coming to the conclusion that no notional income from this property should be taken merely on the ground that during these two years, there was a lull in the commercial activity with regard to this building. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the Department is not justified in taking the notional income from this property by invoking section 22 of the Income-tax Act. These appeals are partly allowed
-
1990 (10) TMI 132 - ITAT DELHI
Chargeable To Tax, Insurance Premia, Life Insurance, Previous Year, Provident Fund ... ... ... ... ..... included a repayment of the aforesaid amount could have been shown by a copy of the account of M/s Vidya Sagar Parag Kumar in the books of the assessee or the copy of the assessee s account in the account books of M/s Vidya Sagar Parag Kumar. None of the two accounts has been filed before me and the finding of the assessing officer that the payment was out of a loan raised from Vidya Sagar Parag Kumar does not appear to have been challenged before the first appellate authority. In view of the law as discussed in the earlier part of this order, relief under section 80C(2) cannot be allowed if the payments have been made out of loan taken and not repaid during the accounting year itself out of income chargeable to tax. The assessing officer was, therefore, right in denying the benefit of deduction under section 80C(2) to the assessee. The Revenue s appeal is, therefore, allowed and setting aside the order passed by the CIT(Appeals) the order of the assessing officer is restored
-
1990 (10) TMI 131 - ITAT DELHI
Investment Company, Orders Prejudicial To Interests ... ... ... ... ..... he payments did so voluntarily and intended it to be taken as a mere bounty. 3.2 Similarly on page 434 of the report another observation giving the principle as to which gift is to be treated to be part of taxable income is given in the following words In order that a payment, with a gift element or an element of bounty, may be treated as part of the taxable income of a businessman, it must be shown that that gift had been received in the course of, or as a necessary incident of, the recipient s business, whether this is so or not in any given case would depend upon even so many considerations, such, for instance, as the nature of the business, the relationship between the giver of the gift and the recipient, and various other attendant circumstances. 4.Since the amounts of gifts were directly correlated with the assessee s business, the same were to be treated as taxable income. Action of the D.C. (Appeals) is hereby confirmed. 5. In the result assessee s appeal is dismissed
-
1990 (10) TMI 130 - ITAT DELHI
Investment Company, Orders Prejudicial To Interests ... ... ... ... ..... ion 263 was correct. Since the facts in the case before me are different the ratio of this case will not be applicable. 13. In paragraph 7 of his order the Commissioner had stated that the ITO should pierce the corporate veil and bring to tax the unaccounted money without taking into account the artificial distinction between the company and the shareholders. In my opinion, this is not a sound proposition. The distinction between the company and the shareholders is nothing artificial. It is real legal distinction. It is not possible with the law as it is now to treat the company and the shareholders as one and the same party. Piercing the corporate veil is to avail the Taxation Department in certain circumstances but surely in the case of a company which has just then been floated and that has hardly done any trade activity, there is no question of piercing the corporate veil for any purpose. 14. In the result, the order of the Commissioner is set aside and the appeal allowed
-
1990 (10) TMI 129 - ITAT COCHIN
Assessing Officer, Assessment Proceedings, Deduction In Respect, Levy Of Penalty, Natural Justice, Penalty Proceedings
............
|
