|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 141 to 160 of 233 Records
-
1982 (2) TMI 94 - ITAT AMRITSAR
Amount Not Deductible, Salary Paid To Partners ... ... ... ... ..... tion of all these aspects, we are of the view that the disallowance of interest could not be justified under the provisions of section 40(b). 9. The department has relied on the decision of the Tribunal in IT Appeal No. 16 (Asr.) of 1979 which has already been referred to above. We find that the various aspects of the matter had not been brought out before the Tribunal at that time and, therefore, the matter had not been considered from all these aspects. 10. There is another aspect of the matter that the partner, who has to pay any interest on the money invested by him in the firm, can claim it under section 36 of the Act. In the present case, however, as the partner has not borrowed any money himself, he cannot claim this deduction in its assessment. The disallowance of such claim in the hands of the firm and non-allowance of such amount in the hands of the partners would result in injustice as far as the claim of interest is concerned. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1982 (2) TMI 93 - ITAT ALLAHABAD-B
... ...
... ... ..... forbid a further provision later on in the remaining property. We have also gone through the various decisions of the Appellate Tribunal in which reliance has been placed on behalf of the assessee. In the case of the decision of Bombay B Bench the facts were very much similar and the partial partition was upheld by holding that the deed of partial partition could be signed by the Karta on his own behalf and on behalf of his minor son. A similar view was held in the other 2 cases also. We are in respectful agreement with the above decisions. Having regard to the above, we are therefore, of the view that the assessee had duly established the existence of a valid partial partition which was entitled to be recognised and that the income-tax authorities were in error in holding otherwise. The assessment of the assessee HUF will, therefore, be modified accordingly. 7. In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed subject to the observations made by us here in above.
-
1982 (2) TMI 92 - ITAT ALLAHABAD-B
Hindu Undivided Family, Assessment After Partition ... ... ... ... ..... d a further provision later on in the remaining property. We have also gone through the various decisions of the Tribunal in which reliance has been placed on behalf of the assessee. In the case of the decision of the Bombay Tribunal B Bench, the facts were very much similar and the partial partition was upheld by holding that the deed of partial partition could be signed by the karta on his own behalf and on behalf of his minor son. A similar view was held in the other two cases also. We are in respectful agreement with the above decisions. Having regard to the above, we are, therefore, of the view that the assessee had duly established the existence of a valid partial partition which was entitled to be recognised and that the income-tax authorities were in error in holding otherwise. The assessment of the assessee-HUF will, therefore, be modified accordingly. 8. In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed subject to the observations made by us herein above.
-
1982 (2) TMI 91 - ITAT ALLAHABAD-B
Penalty, For Concealment Of Income ... ... ... ... ..... same time, the ITO charges the assessee with concealment of income and/or furnishing inaccurate particulars thereof in respect of those items. We are further surprised that even where the AAC cancels the penalty on the ground that the items having been disclosed in Part III of the return, in view of the assurance given by paragraph 2 of the notice under sections 139(2) and 133, no charge of concealment of income and/or furnishing of inaccurate particulars thereof can lie, the revenue considers it necessary to come up in appeal against the order of the AAC. We have, therefore, not the least hesitation in coming to the conclusion that, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, there was no question of any penalty under section 271(1)(c), the penalty imposed by the ITO was unjustified and this penalty was rightly cancelled by the AAC. The order of the AAC, therefore, in our view, was perfectly justified and did not call for any interference. 6. The appeal is dismissed.
-
1982 (2) TMI 90 - ITAT ALLAHABAD-B
Rectification Of Mistakes ... ... ... ... ..... on made under section 154 was a valid one, the ITO could not have passed an order under that section with a view to rectify the mistakes pointed out in the application of the assessee as none of them could have been rectified without long-drawn process of arguments and reasonings. In this view of the matter, we are of the opinion that in view of now celebrated decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Volkart Bros., no order under section 154 could have been passed by the ITO with a view to rectify the purported mistakes apparent from the record. The decision relied on behalf of the assessee again would not be of any help as we find from the said decision that the mistakes pointed out in the orders in those two cases were apparent and glaring which could be rectified under section 154. However, as pointed out earlier, such is not the case in the instant appeal. We would, therefore, uphold the order of the AAC under appeal. 9. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.
-
1982 (2) TMI 89 - ITAT ALLAHABAD-B
Transfer Of Assets, For Benefit Of Spouse Or Minor Child ... ... ... ... ..... as itself erroneous and unjustified. The order of the Commissioner under section 263 is, therefore, hereby cancelled. 8. This means that the order of the AAC which had the effect of restoring the assessment originally made by the ITO and deleting the addition made in consequence of the order of the Commissioner under section 263 cannot be said to be at all incorrect. It is, therefore, not necessary for us to comment on the other arguments of the learned departmental representative, Shri Srivastava, raised in the appeal filed by the revenue and we have no hesitation in coming to the conclusion that on the facts and in the circumstances of the present case, the order of the AAC, Range-I, Kanpur, does not call for any interference. 9. The appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner under section 263, therefore, succeeds and is hereby allowed, while the appeal filed by the revenue against the order of the AAC, Range-I, Kanpur, fails and is hereby dismissed.
-
1982 (2) TMI 88 - ITAT ALLAHABAD-A
... ...
... ... ..... we are also mindful of the fact that cl. 4 of the Memorandum and Articles of Association of the assess company specifically provides that the income and property of the association shall be applied solely towards the promotion of its objects and that no portion thereof is to be paid or transferred by way of profit to the members thereof. Since the assessee association is established for charitable purposes, the fact that it offers in return for subscription or donations, special benefits or the privilege to the persons to become its members would not detract from its charitable nature. The AAC was, therefore, right in holding that the dominant purpose of the association being charitable even if there is some income, it could not be held that it was a profit earning association and that the principle of mutuality was still applicable. Accordingly, we find no force in this appeal which must fail and be dismissed. 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed.
-
1982 (2) TMI 87 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-C
Rectification Of Mistakes, Apparent From Records ... ... ... ... ..... ated in Mahendra Mills case would apply to the present case also. In that case a change in the value of the closing stock for one year was considered to be a mistake apparent from record justifying the rectification of the value of the opening stock for another year. If the revenue s interpretation is correct, one could say that the mistake should be apparent from the record of that particular year. In the sense that a change in the facts relating to one year affects another year as a mistake apparent from record, it would be perfectly justifiable to hold that a finding in one case can be the cause for rectification in a connected case. The ITO having once accepted that the salary was received by the individuals on the basis of the statements made by the firm, cannot tax the salary again in the hands of the HUFS. The mistake is apparent from record. We direct that the amounts added by way of salary in the case of the HUFs be deleted. 5. In the result, the appeals are allowed.
-
1982 (2) TMI 86 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-B
... ...
... ... ..... 5 per share are based on the same WT Rule. On Revenue s own approach under the WT Rules followed and taking note of the Gujarat authority in 1975 CTR (Guj) 1 (1975) 100 ITR 447 (Guj), it is apparent that only the balance-sheet as on 31st March, 1971 would be relevant for determining the value of shares on the date of gift, namely, 14th March, 1972. It is not disputed by the Revenue that on the basis of balance-sheet as on 31st March, 1971 on break up value method even the value per share would be Rs. 2253. This being the factual position, it cannot be said that there was any under-statement of the value of shares and any income at all had escaped assessment. This being so, the ITO has no jurisdiction to reopen the assessment under s. 147(b). The conclusion of the CIT(A) on this aspect of the matter is quite sound. 7. In the result, for the reasons above, we uphold the conclusion of the CIT(A) in quashing the reassessment made by the ITO and dismiss the appeal of the Revenue.
-
1982 (2) TMI 85 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-B
... ...
... ... ..... of the prescribed contingency in the facts and circumstances of this case will not convert that receipt into a trading receipt. This is not a case of a deposit received by a businessman which in substance partakes more of the nature of trading receipts than of security deposits. The subsequent forfeiture of the amount of deposit will also not render the security deposit under consideration as a trading receipt as held by the CIT. The CIT in para 1 accepts the position that the deposit was not a trading receipt at the time it was received. As stated earlier, forfeiture of such an amount of deposit will not change the nature of the deposit and make it taxable trading receipt. It is not the business of the assessee company to recruit technical staff. On a consideration of the whole issue, we feel that order of the CIT under section 263 is not sustainable on merits and it is consequently set aside and the order of the ITO is restored. 5. The appeal of the assessee gets allowed.
-
1982 (2) TMI 84 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-B
... ...
... ... ..... in respect of such part of the aggregate of the sums referred to in sub-clauses (iv), (v), (vi) and (vii) of clause (a) and in clause (b) of sub-section (2) as exceeds ten per cent of the gross total income (as reduced by any portion thereof on which income-tax is not payable under any provision of this Act and by any amount in respect of which the assessee is entitled to a deduction under any other provision of this Chapter), or two hundred thousand rupees, whichever is less. It is, therefore, clear that the expression gross total income is given a special meaning for the purpose of section 80G(4) of the Act. A reading of the above provisions clearly shows that deduction under section 80J has to be taken into consideration before the gross total income for the purpose of relief under section 80G is determined. In this view of the matter, therefore, we decline to interfere with the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) and uphold his order. 10. The appeal is partly allowed.
-
1982 (2) TMI 83 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-B
Business Income ... ... ... ... ..... in the facts and circumstances of this case will not convert that receipt into a trading receipt. This is not a case of a deposit received by a businessman which in substance partakes more of the nature of trading receipts than of security deposits. The subsequent forfeiture of the amount of deposit will also not render the security deposit under consideration as a trading receipt as held by the Commissioner. The Commissioner in para 1 accepts the position that the deposit was not a trading receipt at the time it was received. As stated earlier, forfeiture of such an amount of deposit will not change the nature of the deposit and make it taxable trading receipt. It is not the business of the assessee-company to recruit technical staff. On a consideration of the whole issue, we feel that the order of the Commissioner under section 263 is not sustainable on merits and it is consequently set aside and the order of the ITO is restored. 5. The appeal of the assessee gets allowed.
-
1982 (2) TMI 82 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-B
... ...
... ... ..... der in revision which, in our opinion, lays down a very fair basis, is taken into consideration, then the value of benefit in the instant case will have to be determined with reference to the interest charged to Central Government employees by the Central Government under its Rules governing house building advances as prevalent for the relevant assessment years and the interest paid by the assessee on the loan at the rate of 4 per cent plus the value of insurance premium which he is required to pay on the insurance policy which he was required to take and assign in favour of the employer as a condition for obtaining the said loan. This aspect of the matter, however, has not been considered by the authorities below. We, therefore, remit the matter to the ITO to reconsider the question relating to determination of value of perquisite in the instant case for all the years in the light of our observations above. 5. The appeals are treated as allowed for the purpose of statistics.
-
1982 (2) TMI 81 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-A
... ...
... ... ..... (A) has made observations holding M/s Unique Associates to be illusory and existing on paper without giving any opportunity of being heard to the assessee as well as to the concerned persons, etc. and therefore, the entire order commending from para 7 onwards was vitiated. The stand of the assessee in its appeal is also quite sound and though the assessee has requested for quashing and annulling of CGT (A) finding in paras 7 to 11 of his order, we consider it adequate to set aside the findings of CGT(A) on this issue right from paras 6 to 11 onwards and restore it to his file and direct him to dispose it of afresh after hearing both the sides and making any enquires considered necessary. We order accordingly. These observations will dispose of both ground Nos. 2 and 3 of the Revenue and the appeal of the assessee. 6. In the result, for statistical purposes only, the appeal of the Revenue may be treated to be partly allowed and similarly the appeal of the assessee as allowed.
-
1982 (2) TMI 80 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-A
Urban Assets ... ... ... ... ..... encumbered asset is fixed. 6. In view of the above discussion, we hold that the treatment accorded by the WTO in the three assessment orders is correct in the eye of law and the view taken by the Commissioner is erroneous. Consequently, we set aside the combined order of the Commissioner under section 25(2) and restore the assessment orders passed by the WTO. 7. The assessee s counsel also had objected to the Commissioner s order setting aside the whole assessment when only a specific issue according to him needed modification. Relying on the Delhi High Court judgment in Addl. CIT v. J.K. D Costa 1982 133 ITR 7, it was contended that the total setting aside of the assessment orders was unwarranted. The argument of the assessee s counsel on this score also is sound but we need not decide this aspect of the matter as we have already set aside the combined order of the Commissioner and restored the assessment order of the WTO. 8. In the result, all the three appeals are allowed.
-
1982 (2) TMI 79 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Adjudication for confiscation - Import ... ... ... ... ..... eds of 1,219.23 metric tonnes of palm oil, now in the hands of the Customs department, to the petitioner-bank, after deduction of (1) the redemption fine of Rs. 9,60,000 as ordered by the first respondent in his order dated 6th August, 1980, (2) all the dues to the Port Trust, the second respondent, including the demurrage charges, and (3) all duties by way of customs duty and other charges that are legally leviable by the Customs department. 28.I make it clear that inasmuch as the Central Board of Excise and Customs, by its order, dated 4th December, 1980, has held that the fourth respondent is not in any way connected with the illegal importation, there will be no endorsement on its licence concerning this importation. 29. The Customs department will have every right to issue notice to the petitioner-bank and take proceedings under Section 112 of the Customs Act with regard to the imposition of personal penalty, notwithstanding the above. There will be no order as to costs.
-
1982 (2) TMI 78 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Revision by Central Government - Difference of opinion - Order - Appellate order ... ... ... ... ..... ioners contention in respect of this fabric has been upheld and the same was held to be basically dress material and not furnishing fabric. In the result, Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer (a) but restricted to the appellate order of February, 1975 (exhibit E to the petition) and the revisional order (exhibit G to the petition). This will mean that proceedings will start from the appellate stage anew and the appellate decision is required to be taken after hearing the petitioners. Parties are directed to bear their own costs. 5. At the appellate stage, it is indicated that the petitioners want to lead further evidence. For this purpose they must make necessary application to the appellate authority which he will deal with on merits. As the original impugned order of the Assistant Collector is of 1972, it is desirable that the appellate authority will dispose of the appeal as expeditiously as possible under the circumstances and preferably on or before 15th June, 1982.
-
1982 (2) TMI 77 - HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Valuation - Trade discount ... ... ... ... ..... which are alleged to have been paid by the appellant to its agents for the promotion of the sale of goods are not trade discounts within the meaning of the explanation to Section 4. In the circumstances and apart from the reasons given by the Assistant Collector of Custorrts, as the commissions cannot be treated as trade discounts, we are of the view that the learned Judge was justified in overruling the contention of the appellant for the deduction of the amounts of commission as trade discounts under the explanation to Section 4. The decision of the Supreme Court in A.K. Roy and Anr. v. Voltas Ltd., A.I.R. 1973 S.C. 225 1977 E.L.T. (J.177)(S.C.) does not in any manner support the contention of the appellant for such deduction of the amounts of commission from the manufacturing cost and manufacturing profit of the goods concerned. No other point has been urged in this appeal. For the reasons aforesaid, this appeal is dismissed. There will, however, be no order as to costs.
-
1982 (2) TMI 76 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Customs - Notified goods - Burden of proof - Smuggled goods - Seizure and confiscation - Adjudication - Evidence - Defence witnesses
-
1982 (2) TMI 75 - HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
Confiscation valid if V.C.R. and colour T.V. were imported without payment of import duty - Reason to believe - Writ jurisdiction
....
|
