|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 141 to 160 of 248 Records
-
1988 (7) TMI 108 - ITAT GAUHATI
... ...
... ... ..... ndha and Kishanchand Road, the valuation would betaken as per Valuer s report. The total value computed by him at Rs. 2,06,000 and odd. The assessee took up the matter before the AAC, who gave an overall relief by reducing the value on ad hoc basis to Rs. 1,90,000 which the Tribunal sustained. Since a number of properties were subjected to valuation made by the Valuation Officer which should have been heard by the AAC as mentioned earlier, and as the AAC has given ad hoc relief without specifying each particular items of property, we feel that in the peculiar circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, the AAC should dispose of the matter afresh and after giving the departmental valuer specific opportunity of being heard and also to the assessee in respect of valuation matter only, in respect of properties concerned dealt with in the Valuation Officer s valuation report. 9. In the result, the miscellaneous petition is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.
-
1988 (7) TMI 107 - ITAT DELHI-E
Exemption, House Property ... ... ... ... ..... of a life interest is entitled to exemption under section 5(1)(iv) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957. No decision contrary to this decision and countering the position stated us above, was cited on behalf of the department. What is more, in the income-tax assessments of the assessee, the income from the property in question has all along been treated and accepted by the department itself as income from house property . This implies the fact that the position that the life interest possessed by the assessee in the house property in question was treated as ownership, has all along been accepted by the department. Therefore, it could not take a contradictory stand so far as the wealth-tax assessments are concerned. We are, therefore, of the considered view that the claim of exemption under section 5(1)(iv) was very rightly upheld by the learned Appellate Asstt. Commissioner. We accordingly upheld his order. 6. In the result, the appeals filed by the department fail and are dismissed.
-
1988 (7) TMI 106 - ITAT DELHI-E
Reassessment, Time Limit For Completion of ... ... ... ... ..... cer could pass orders afresh for the assessment years 1970-71 to 1974-75 on or before 31st March, 1985 and for the assessment year 1975-76 on or before 31-3-1986 as the order of the Appellate Tribunal cannot be constructed as an order setting a side or cancelling the assessment. However, all the impugned order were made on25th March, 1987. These were, therefore, clearly beyond the period of limitations. These were rightly cancelled by the learned Commissioner of Wealth-tax (Appeals). As such, there is no justification made out by the Revenue for any interference in his impugned order. 11. The appeals of the Revenue are, therefore, dismissed. 12. Before we close, we would like to observe that we have carefully gone through the authorities cited from both the sides and since we found these authorities not directly on the issue before us, we have refrained from mentioning any of them discussing the same in the body of this order because the issue before us is really res integra.
-
1988 (7) TMI 105 - ITAT DELHI-D
... ...
... ... ..... d down the principle that under the mercantile system of accounting contingent liabilities do not constitute expenditure. This is only a reiteration of an earlier principle laid down by the Supreme Court and not a new principle laid down for the first time. Neither the facts of that case nor the provision involved for interpretation nor the law laid down therein can have any application to the issue before me now. As I have observed earlier theAllahabadand Calcutta High Courts have consistently held interpreting provisions in pari materia that the amount payable towards additional cane price is a liability in prasenti and not a contingent liability. I am therefore unable to derive any assistance from the decision of the Supreme Court in Shree Sajjan Mills case relied upon by the learned Departmental Representative. I agree with the view of the learned Judicial Member. 15. The matter will now go before the regular Bench for disposal of the appeal according to majority opinion.
-
1988 (7) TMI 104 - ITAT DELHI-D
Deduction Of Tax At Source, Consequence Of Failure To Deduct Or Pay ... ... ... ... ..... n by the assessee for not discharging its duty on facts is not satisfactory. The assessee, therefore, was rightly treated as the assessee in default by the Income-tax Officer. The learned Appellate Assistant Commissioner was fully justified in supporting the action of the Income-tax Officer. 10. We have very carefully considered the judgments cited on behalf of the assessee. However, we find that each of the judgments turned on its own facts which were distinguishable from the facts of the case of the assessee. The assessee has not shown that in the case of the two employees in respect of the salary of whom the tax had not been deducted properly had got their assessments completed and paid the tax and no further tax was due from them as held in these judgments relied upon by the assessee. We are of the opinion, therefore, that there is no case made out for an interference in the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner by the assessee. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed
-
1988 (7) TMI 103 - ITAT DELHI-D
Business Deduction or Loss, Year In Which Deductible, Sugar Manufacturing Company ... ... ... ... ..... e principle that under the mercantile system of accounting, continent liabilities do not constitute expenditure. This is only a retraction of an earlier principle laid down by the Supreme Court and not a new principle laid down for the first time. Neither the facts of that case nor the provision involved for interpretation, nor the law laid down therein can have any application to the issue before me now. As I have observed earlier, theAllahabadand Calcutta High Courts have consistently held interpreting provisions in pari materia that the amount payable towards additional cane price is a liability in praesenti and not a contingent liability. I am therefore unable to derive any assistance from the decision of the Supreme Court in Shree Sajjan Mills Ltd. s case relied upon by the learned departmental representative. I agree with the view of the learned Judicial Member. 15. The matter will now go before the regular Bench for disposal of the appeal according to majority opinion.
-
1988 (7) TMI 102 - ITAT DELHI-C
Deduction, Deduction Only On Actual Payment ... ... ... ... ..... ax would form part of the trading receipt of the assesses and we have held in view of the two judgments of the Hon ble Supreme Court that sales tax would be a part of the trading receipts of the assessee. Once the amounts in dispute are held to be a part and parcel of the trading receipts, the issue regarding admissible deduction relating thereto arises and, therefore, it is considered by us in the light of the relevant provisions of the law. In our considered opinion, therefore, even the judgment in the above case by the Division Bench is not of help to the assessee. 12. On the entirety of the facts of the case, we, therefore, hold that the authorities below rightly brought the disputed amounts of sales tax into the computation of total income of the assessee and further rightly held that the deduction respect of the same amounts could not be allowed as the payment had not been made within the previous year. These grounds are, therefore, also dismissed. 13. Appeal dismissed.
-
1988 (7) TMI 101 - ITAT DELHI-C
Penalty For Concealment, Concealment Of Income, Penalty, False Estimate Or Failure To Pay Advance Tax
-
1988 (7) TMI 100 - ITAT DELHI-B
... ...
... ... ..... ble under law. 6. For the reasons discussed above, we are of the opinion that no loss having been determined in the assessee s case for asst. yr. 1979-80, no carry forward was permissible in asst. yrs. 1980-81 and 1981-82. As regards the assessee s contention that the loss included depreciation granted to the firm that, in our view, does not make any difference so far as the assessee s assessment was concerned. Under sub-s. (2) of s. 32, depreciation allowance to which effect could not be given in the assessment of the firm or its partners could be treated to be a part of the depreciation allowance of the firm for the succeeding year. Such a contention could, therefore, possibly be raised in the assessment of the firm and not in the case of the assessee partner. 7. For the above reasons, we allow these appeals by the Revenue and the orders passed by the learned AAC are set aside and the orders passed by the ITO on the subject are sustained. The Cross-Objections are dismissed.
-
1988 (7) TMI 99 - ITAT DELHI-A
... ...
... ... ..... fic performance, the agreement of 17th Nov., 1975, though was the basis, could not be acted upon in its terms and for the consideration mentioned therein and the land rates fixed by the L and DO could not be considered the basis of or market value of the said property and because of applicability of land Ceiling Act, the same should have been scaled down (x) The comparable sales, relied by the Acquisition Authority and Valuation Officer could not be relied upon as very close to17th Nov., 1975. There were sale of almost adjacent and similar properties and the same should have been relied upon. The hazard of litigation and applicability of Land Ceiling Act had all the impact of the value of the said property. 22. For more than one reasons, both on the basis of facts and according to law, acquisition proceedings are vacated and all the appeals filed by M/s Rohit Tower Building Ltd. M/s Saw Pipes Ltd. M/s Jindal Strips Ltd., M/s Nalwa Steels Ltd. and Smt. Urmila Devi are allowed.
-
1988 (7) TMI 98 - ITAT DELHI-A
Business Expenditure, Allowability of ... ... ... ... ..... the principle laid down by the Supreme Court in Kalyanji Mavji and Co. s case. Compulsory nature of these repairs was held to be an expenditure incurred for the purpose of the business. This principle applies, in our opinion, mutatis mutandis to the facts before us. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the authorities were not justified in disallowing the claim of the assessee. We direct that this amount be allowed as deduction. 5. There is another ground relating to the levy of interest under sections 139(8) and 217. It was pointed out, at the time of hearing, that the levy of interest under these two sections was consequential to the disallowance of the sum of Rs. 1,82,101 and if that sum is allowed, the occasion to charge interest under these two sections will not arise. As we have directed the allowance of the sum referred to above, the ITO will re-calculate the levy of interest under these two sections and levy interest only if they are still leviable according to law.
-
1988 (7) TMI 97 - ITAT CUTTACK
Exemption, Gift On Marriage Of Relative, Dependent ... ... ... ... ..... n 5(1), exemption is given up to a maximum of Rs. 10,000 in value on the occasion of the marriage of any relative (male or female) dependent upon the donor for support and maintenance. If the gift exceeds this amount, only the excess will be considered in computing the taxable gift. Normal expenditure incurred on the marriage itself like expenses on a feast, etc. will not be taken into account in computing the value of the gifts. The exemption will be allowed also in cases of gifts made by a Hindu undivided family to members of the family dependent upon the family for support and maintenance. The above circular clearly shows that the CBDT had no objection to treat male or female dependent as relative of an HUF. 9. In the above circumstances, we hold that the gift to the extent of Rs. 10,000 in this case is allowed as deduction. 10. In the result, the appeals of the department are dismissed while the cross objections supporting the order of the Ld. AAC have become infructuous.
-
1988 (7) TMI 96 - ITAT COCHIN
Assessment Year, Valuation Officer ... ... ... ... ..... llows Front Block All the floors (except 5th, 6th and 7th) were constructed before the assessment year 1983-84. No controversy on cost of construction of 5th, 6th and 7th floors before us. Central Block Up to Second Floor the issue is not before us. Third and Fourth Floors were constructed in 1982-83 assessment year (Paras 24 and 25). Rear Block Ground and first floor constructed before assessment year 1982-83. Second floor partly constructed in 1981-82 (assessment year 1982-83) 4000 sq.ft. of second floor and 4890 sq.ft. of third floor constructed in 1982-83 (assessment year 1983-84). Third floor 2824 sq.ft. and 4th floor constructed in 1983-84 (assessment year 1984-85). Rate C.P.W.D. rates should be reduced by 10 . Lift Income-tax Officer s estimate restored. Furniture Income-tax Officer s estimate restored. Medical Equipments Rs. 48,246 plus Rs. 4,800 to be considered in assessment year 1983-84, Rs. 9,000 for assessment year 1985-86. 41. All the appeals are partly allowed.
-
1988 (7) TMI 95 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... eing in favour of the assessee been on merit, the action of the CIT (A) deserves to be confirmed. 6. Before we part with the matter, we may mention that in the instant case when all the facts were available at the time of original assessment, as is apparent from para 2 of the CIT (A) s order, extracted and placed above, it is apparently a change of opinion. 7. Coming to proceedings under s. 147(b) having been initiated on the basis of audit note whether it is an objection pertaining to facts or law, would arise afterwards. But initially in case the audit objection is objected to by the Revenue itself and found to be wrong, the very basis of proceedings is taken away and the same cannot stand. 8. Then coming to merit, in the light of the Punjab and Haryana High Court decision in case of the Punjab State Cooperative Society and Marketing Federation Ltd., the Revenue has no case. The order of the CIT (A) is, therefore, confirmed. 9. In the result, revenue s appeal is dismissed.
-
1988 (7) TMI 94 - ITAT CALCUTTA-B
... ...
... ... ..... consideration The voluntary payment was not traceable to any source which a practical man may, regard as the real source of his income In view of the facts found in that case it was held by the Tribunal that the prize money received by the assessee cannot be considered to be his income and hence, it cannot be subjected to tax In the instant case the Commissioner without ascertaining the relevant facts, recorded a finding that the prize money constituted income of the assessee As has Just been Pointed out above while setting aside the assessment the issue was left open by the Commissioner we, therefore set aside the finding of the Commissioner on the question regarding the taxability of the prize money This issue is left open and shall he examined by the ITO while framing the assessment afresh. It will no doubt be open to the assessee to rely on order of the Tribunal dated 30th Oct., 1987 before the ITO. 11. Subject to the observation made above, the appeal stands dismissed.
-
1988 (7) TMI 93 - ITAT BOMBAY-D
... ...
... ... ..... that any finding has been given that the production of the film was completed during the year of account and since this is an ex parte order, for the same reason, there is no adjustment for the cost of production of the expenses already incurred or to be incurred under r. 9A. In our opinion, therefore, it is not proper to draw an adverse inference against the assessee merely because an ex parte assessment in respect of this source of income has taken place for an immediately preceding year. We would, therefore, direct the ITO to recompute the income of the assessee on the basis that he has been maintaining books of account on cash basis. The ITO should determine the receipts and expenses during the year and work out the assessee s total income under s. 145 of the Act after proper scrutiny of the books of account. For this limited purpose, the case is restored to the file of the ITO for the asst. yr. 1979-80. 15. The appeal will be treated as allowed for statistical purposes.
-
1988 (7) TMI 92 - ITAT BOMBAY-D
Settlement Commission, Powers Of Settlement Commission ... ... ... ... ..... see filed an appeal to the Tribunal against the revisional order also before the settlement application was allowed to be proceeded with by an order under sec. 245D. The Tribunal is within its rights to examine the issues raised before it independently on the basis of evidence the issue raised before it independently on the basis of evidence placed and arguments advanced before it. If the Tribunal s decision, on merits, which was specifically prayed for by the assessee s counsel, is not acceptable to the revenue, there are other remedies available to the revenue than the type of misc. application that the revenue has chosen to file. There is certainly no mistake apparent from record. No argument that was advanced by either side or no document that was produced, which was relevant to the issue, was omitted to be considered. We, therefore, do not find any reason to reconsider or review our order even on merits. Misc. Application No. 95/ (Bom) /88 dt. 8-6-1988 is also dismissed.
-
1988 (7) TMI 91 - ITAT BOMBAY-B
Assessment Year, Reopening Assessment ... ... ... ... ..... on of omission or failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts and he may have a tentative belief on the material before him, but such material must be capable of forming a reasonable belief and not a mere suspicion. Any of the two statements given on oath by Sri R.K.Thakkar might be correct. Thus there is a state of suspicion which cannot be founded upon for forming a reasonable belief, though it may be a piece of information in possession of the ITO for proceeding u/s. 147(b). In the words of the Hon ble Supreme Court, we have to bear in mind that it is not any and every material howsoever vague and indefinite which would warrant the formation of the belief. 9. It is therefore held that reassessment cannot be made u/s. 147(a), but can be made u/s. 147(b). However, the reassessment u/s. 147(b) is admittedly barred by limitation. The reassessments for both the years are therefore cancelled. 10. In the result, both the appeals are allowed.
-
1988 (7) TMI 90 - ITAT BOMBAY
... ...
... ... ..... ould have condoned the delay in the matter of filling of appeal cannot be considered as a relevant factor in the matter of determining the taxability of the sum of Rs. 1,75,32,600 which stands remitted as a result of the Kerala High Court Order dt. 15th April, 1981. The order of the CIT is not also open to serious challenge on the ground that the order which is sought to be revised under s. 263 of the IT Act was neither an erroneous order nor an order prejudicial to the interests of Revenue. As has been observed earlier, if the ITO passes an order without due regard to the provisions of the Act, the consequence whereof was even deferment of payment of tax, such order will have to be considered as an order erroneous being prejudicial to the interests of Revenue. In the circumstances, we are of the opinion that the CIT in passing the order under s. 263 has not exceeded his jurisdiction and we see no reason to interfere with the same. 13. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.
-
1988 (7) TMI 89 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-C
... ...
... ... ..... in the present cases are quite clear and need no help from the principles enunciated in the cited cases for their approval by us. At the most we can, with the help of the authorities relied upon, observe that in the present cases it was highly uncharitable on the part of the ITO to characterise the assessee firm as non-genuine when all the facts and circumstances of the case, as pointed out by us above clearly indicated that Shri Shewcharan Purohit was in fact an active partner in the assessee firm and the relationship of agency existed between him vis-a-vis all the other partners of the firm including Smt. Radhabai Kothari, whose casual statement that Shri Shewcharan Purohit was not a partner was not to be given much importance for the reasons mentioned above by us and in the ratio of the decision of the M.P. High Court in the case of United Patel Construction. We thus find no force in these appeals and dismiss them as such. 15. In the result, all the appeals are dismissed.
............
|
