Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 141 to 160 of 235 Records
-
1983 (8) TMI 95 - ITAT BOMBAY-D
... ... ... ... ..... eal raised is the inclusion of Rs. 3,900 by way of bonus. The ITO has added this amount, but it is not clear how he got this figure. The AAC thought it necessary to remit the matter back. We find from the papers placed before us that the assessee has already included the bonus receivable in the salary income computed by the ITO at Rs. 42,650. On that basis, we are satisfied that the addition of Rs. 3,900 is a duplication. This will be deleted. 4. The third ground is the perquisite valuation of Rs. 6,365. According to the certificate given by the employer, the perquisite was only Rs. 4,265. The figure of Rs. 6,365 is obviously a mistake. The excess of Rs. 2,100 therefore, has to be added. 5. In ground No. 5, the assessee has objected to the levy of interest under s. 139 (8). At the time of hearing, it was accepted that this would be only consequential. 6. In the result, we allow the appeal. The ITO is directed to adjust the interest after giving effect to the appellate order.
-
1983 (8) TMI 94 - ITAT BOMBAY-C
... ... ... ... ..... ax. This reply does not say that the assessee was waiting for the receipt of a demand notice from the Department, in order to pay the advance-tax. We are, therefore, not impressed by this argument given at this late stage. Thus we come to the conclusion that the ITO has discharged whatever burden that lay on him in order to show that the assessee in the case before us squarely came within the four corners of the offence envisaged under s. 273(b) of the Act. Hence, we agree with the Revenue authorities that the assessee was liable to penalty under s. 273(b) of the Act. 11. Coming to the alternative argument of the assessee, we find some force therein. Considering the nature and extent of the assessee s business, we feel that the ends of justice will be met if the quantum of penalty is reduced to the minimum imposable under the law, or Rs. 15,000 whichever is higher. We, direct that the quantum of penalty be reduced accordingly. 12. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed.
-
1983 (8) TMI 93 - ITAT BOMBAY-C
Computing Value, Rent-free Accommodation ... ... ... ... ..... would realise in the same locality. Thereafter, the ITO is expected to adopt the higher of the two figures to be the fair rental value of such rent-free accommodation provided to the employee. The Explanation presupposes the two figures to be different, as in the instant case. The Explanation, in terms, calls upon the ITO to adopt the value which is higher. In the instant case, may be the amount of Rs. 9,394 was the municipal valuation for the accommodation, but the ITO has, on the basis of the rents prevailing in the same building, proceeded to determine the fair rental value of the property, which he determined at Rs. 30,000. Under Explanation 2 he has to take the higher of the two, viz., Rs. 30,000 to be the perquisite value of the property, This he has done. The AAC has, therefore, erred in interfering with the same on a wrong understanding of the law. The order of the AAC is reversed and the order of the ITO is restored. The appeal filed by the revenue is hereby allowed.
-
1983 (8) TMI 92 - ITAT BOMBAY-C
Agricultural Land, Assessment Order, Capital Gains, High Court, Mistake Apparent From Record, Original Assessment
-
1983 (8) TMI 91 - ITAT BOMBAY-C
Business Expenditure, Expenditure Incurred ... ... ... ... ..... 31 claimed by the assessee even by invoking rule 6D. 12. The circular dated 19-6-1950 of the CBDT also helps the case of the assessee because this has not been shown before us to have been withdrawn after the introduction of rule 6D with effect from 1-4-1964. As has been held in the case of Ellerman Lines Ltd. v. CIT 1971 82 ITR 913 (SC), the directions of the CBDT are binding on the income-tax authorities. 13. We also find support for our conclusion from the aforesaid decision dated 3-10-1979 of the Tribunal, which relates to the assessment year 1975-76 in which year, the rule 6D was also in force. 14. For the above reasons, we come to the conclusion that there was no justification for disallowing a part of the minimum expenditure evidently incurred by the assessee wholly and exclusively for the purpose of his profession and so we direct that the whole of Rs. 13,131 be deducted while computing the professional income of the assessee. 15. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1983 (8) TMI 90 - ITAT BOMBAY-B
... ... ... ... ..... there was any fraud or any gross or wilful neglect on the part of the assessee. Further the assessee has fully discharged the onus resting on her shoulders in this respect. She was a non-resident residing in Hongkong all the time. She had entrusted the drawing of the return to a senior Chartered Accountant. There is no doubt about his competence to draw up the return of wealth. He has declared the value of one of the assets at cost and the value of the other asset at slightly higher than the value ascertained by a registered valuer. The return has been signed by constituted attorney, who is the assessee s husband s partner. In our opinion, the assessee cannot be accused of any fraud or any gross or wilful neglect in the filing of the returns. In the circumstances, the CWT(A) was fully justified in acquitting the assessee of the charge of concealment of wealth and cancelling the penalties. The orders of the CWT(A) are upheld and the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed.
-
1983 (8) TMI 89 - ITAT BOMBAY-B
Registered Valuer, Valuation Officer ... ... ... ... ..... lful neglect on the part of the assessee. Further, the assessee has fully discharged the onus resting on her shoulders in this respect. She was a non-resident residing in Hong Kong all the time. She had entrusted the drawing of the return to a senior chartered accountant. There is no doubt about his competence to draw up the return of wealth. He has declared the value of one of the assets at cost and the value of the other assets at slightly higher than the value ascertained by a registered valuer. The return has been signed by the constituted attorney, who is the assessee s husband s partner. In our opinion, the assessee cannot be accused of any fraud or any gross or wilful neglect in the filing of the returns. In the circumstances, the Commissioner (Appeals) was fully justified in acquitting the assessee of the charge of concealment of wealth and cancelling the penalties. The orders of the Commissioner (Appeals) are upheld and the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed.
-
1983 (8) TMI 88 - ITAT BOMBAY-B
... ... ... ... ..... s a matter of fact a benami account for the individual partner. Even if as subtly indicated by the learned counsel for the department, this were to be thought of, the onus is on the department to prove that the account is a benami one. This onus not having been discharged, the account standing in the name of the HUF must be regarded both as a matter of fact and in law as belonging to the HUF only. It has nothing to do with the individual partner. The learned counsel for the department pointed out that making such an entry would be an easy way of getting out of section 40(b). We de not think so, because there is nothing in income-tax law or accountancy which forbids a partner from immediately transferring whatever profits accrue to him to any other person, related or unrelated, a HUF or a stranger. The interest credited cannot be included under section 40(b) in the total income of the assessee-firm. 7. The assessee s appeals are allowed. The departmental appeals are dismissed.
-
1983 (8) TMI 87 - ITAT BOMBAY-A
... ... ... ... ..... ot satisfy the conditions in the first year, if because of the amendment of the provisions of law it fulfils the conditions for the second year, the assessee would be entitled to the exemption from the second year onwards The ITO was aware of this decision. He had tried to distinguish it, but we do not find any distinguishing feature. We are of opinion that the Gujarat High Court Decision would apply and, therefore, the disability of the assessee stands removed. 6. The third reason given by the ITO arises from the common funds utilized. This point has been considered by the Tribunal when this matter had come up before the Tribunal for the asst. yr. 1976-77. It had been held that this was not a reason for disallowing the claim. We adopt the same reasonings on this point also. 7. It is, therefore, clear that the assessee is eligible for deduction u/s 80J The ITO will work out the capital employed in the industrial undertaking according to the law. 8. The appeals are dismissed.
-
1983 (8) TMI 86 - ITAT BOMBAY-A
Concessional Rate ... ... ... ... ..... the question as to whether it can be taxed under the head Income from other sources . For this, we have to look into the inclusive definition of income under section 2(24)(iv) of the Act. However, on going through the language of section 2(24)(iv), we find that it does not apply to an employee like the assessee before us. Further, it cannot be said that the assessee would have been obliged to pay a higher rate of interest had not his employer given the loan at 4 per cent interest because, as pointed out by the assessee himself, he would not have even thought of building a house by taking a loan in the absence of the house building loan scheme of his employer. 15. For the above reasons, we hold that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the assessee derived no benefit or amenity which can be taxed as a perquisite under section 17(2)(iii). Hence, we direct that the sum of Rs. 1,136 be deleted from the total income of the assessee. 16. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1983 (8) TMI 85 - ITAT BOMBAY-A
Flat Rate, Valuation Date ... ... ... ... ..... sessment could be made on the manager, court of wards in relation to the estate and whether the assessment could be made at the maximum rate, the Patna High Court held that an assessment could be made on the manager, court of wards. They further held that in view of the litigation, it was difficult to foresee what would be the final decision and who would inherit the estate and in what proportion. The assessment at the maximum rate was, therefore, held to be valid. In, our opinion, the facts of this case have some parallel with the case before us. In the reported case, the contingency was the decision of the Supreme Court. In the case before us, the contingency is the son of Bhagwatiprasad Jhunjhunwala not getting married. If in the case of Manager, Court of Wards the provisions of section 41(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, would be applicable, we do not see how the application of section 21(1) can be resisted in this case. 12. In the result, the appeals are dismissed.
-
1983 (8) TMI 84 - ITAT AMRITSAR
Depreciation At Higher Rate, Expenditure Incurred, Investment Allowance ... ... ... ... ..... ame of an engineering manufacturer manufacturing furnaces was given and from that party the assessee had purchased a furnace. The third publication of the Government of India is named Build Machines---Build India. In this Chapter IX is devoted to machine tools and accessories and at pages 50-51 the range of machine tools items is described and this also included reference to furnaces of various types. The fourth publication is named The Census of Machine Tools---India 1968. In this at page 27 is a chart dealing with various items of machine tools and there, too, furnaces, melting electric arc shown to be part of machine tools. In the face of this technical evidence emanating from the sources of the Government of India itself, we are in agreement with the view of the Commissioner (Appeals) that depreciation at the higher rate of 15 per cent is admissible. We confirm his action and reject the contention of the revenue. 6. In the result, the appeal of the revenue gets dismissed.
-
1983 (8) TMI 83 - ITAT ALLAHABAD-B
... ... ... ... ..... Veohar constituted annual charge for the purposes of s. 24(1)(iv) as defined under s. 27(iv). Such charge, was, therefore, liable to be deducted while computing the property income of the assessee. We are also of the view that it also satisfied the test of diversion of income at source by overriding title, as laid down by the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Sital Das Tirathdas and Rani Pritam Kunwar. In taking the above view we have also considered the contentions raised on behalf of the assessee in its reply dt. 22nd Jan., 1979 and the order of the Tribunal in the case of the assessee for the asst. yrs. 1961-62 to 1965-66. We are of the view that the Income-tax authorities were not justified in disallowing the annual liabilities or annual charges relating to the maintenance of the Central Dharamshala, Thakurdwara, and Veohar. The assessment would be modified by the ITO after computing the income from house property accordingly. 8. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1983 (8) TMI 82 - ITAT ALLAHABAD-B
Orders Prejudicial To Revenue ... ... ... ... ..... agree with the contention raised on behalf of the assessee that there was no material before the learned Commissioner for acting under section 263. The decision of the Hon ble Delhi High Court in Gee Vee Enterprises case was fully applicable to the facts of the present case and since the ITO had failed to make further enquiries before accepting the revised return filed by the assessee, the learned Commissioner was quite justified in holding the assessment order to be erroneous insofar as it was prejudicial to the interests of the revenue. The learned departmental representative is also justified in pointing out that the learned Commissioner has not foreclosed the matter and that he has only set aside the assessment order to be made afresh after making due and proper enquiries into the facts of the case and after giving proper opportunity to the assessee. Accordingly, we find no force in this appeal, which must fail and be dismissed. 7. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.
-
1983 (8) TMI 81 - ITAT ALLAHABAD-B
Business Income ... ... ... ... ..... he bars and shares so withdrawn. It was held that no income arose to the assessee as a result of the transfer of share and silver bars to the trustees. It was further held that the assessee might have stored up a future advantage for himself but as the transactions were not business transactions and as he derived no immediate pecuniary gain, the State could not tax them, for under Act the State has no power to tax a potential future advantage. It was also observed that in revenue cases regard must be had to the substance of the transaction rather than to its mere form. 4. In view of the above authorities, we hold that no income had accrued to the assessee as interest on the advances made by her to Vishwanath Prasad Didwania and Didwania Industries and, therefore, none could be brought to tax in her hands in either of the above assessment years. We, therefore, delete the additions of Rs. 12,000 in both the above assessment years. 5. In the result, both the appeals are allowed.
-
1983 (8) TMI 80 - ITAT ALLAHABAD-B
Charitable Or Religious Trust ... ... ... ... ..... have been considered as if the prescription of the time limit under rule 17 was directory and not mandatory. In this connection, the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of Smt. Godavaridevi Saraf also helps the assessee. Since the learned Commissioner (Appeals) did not consider the claim of the assessee under section 11(2)(a) on merits, we direct that the same be examined by him and decided after hearing the assessee. 9. The assessee is also right in placing reliance on the decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of H.E.H. the Nizam s Supplemental Religious Endowment Trust for the proposition that the payments on account of tax made in the assessment years in question were entitled to be treated as expenditure incidental to the carrying out of the purposes of the assessee and that such payment could not be excluded from exemption and were, thus, to be excluded from the assessee s income. 10. In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed.
-
1983 (8) TMI 79 - ITAT ALLAHABAD-B
Penalty, Validity Of Order ... ... ... ... ..... it in accordance with law and not against a different entity not guilty of any default. 10. We also do not think that any of the cases cited by the learned departmental representative in any way, help the department of compel us to set aside the order of the Commissioner (Appeals). In M.K. Gupta s case, the Allahabad High Court merely held that section 292B was prospective in operation and applied with effect from 1-10-1975 and not with an earlier date. The scope and the meaning of the section were not considered by the High Court in this case. The Calcutta High Court in Bengal and Assam Investors Ltd. s case again did not have an occasion to consider the question of status of an assessee and whether it could be rectified under section 292B. 11. Our finding, therefore, is that the Commissioner (Appeals) was amply justified in cancelling the penalty wrongly imposed on Shri Jangi Lal as an individual. We, therefore, uphold his order. 12. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.
-
1983 (8) TMI 78 - ITAT ALLAHABAD-B
Charitable And Religious Purposes, Charitable Or Religious Trust ... ... ... ... ..... However, a trust for the benefit of the public with a direction that preference should be given to the members of the settlor s family in the selection of beneficiaries, is nonetheless a valid charity if the trust is created before 1-4-1962 as in the present case. In the present case, it could not be said that in the trust deed the benefit to the community was remote or that the paramount and dominant object was the relief of the settlor s relatives. Therefore, in the light of the provisions of section 5(1)(i) read with the proviso to section 21A as explained by the various decisions referred to above and in the light of the provisions of the trust deed, we are of the view that the wealth-tax authorities were not justified in not granting exemption to the assessee-trust under section 5(1)(i). In our view, the assessee was duly entitled to the said exemption and wealth-tax assessment should be modified for the assessment year in question, accordingly. 8. The appeal is allowed.
-
1983 (8) TMI 77 - ITAT ALLAHABAD-B
Net Wealth, Transfer Of Property ... ... ... ... ..... he gates of the imambara and the year 1224 Hijri on the masjid) and that the income from the groves was all spent always thereon and the wakf continued to be acted upon. The report dated 9-12-1971 of Shri A.Z. Kazmi, Assistant Secretary, Shia Central Board of Wakfs, U.P., Lucknow, is also to the effect that the wakf in question is an immemorial wakf by user. The original order dated 27-1-1978 of the AAC mentions that the assessee had filed before him extracts from a Bombay Journal published in 1916, wherein reference regarding the wakf in question was available. In view of the foregoing material, we are of the view that the existence of an oral wakf by immemorial user was duly established. We are in agreement with the order of the learned AAC and accordingly we uphold his order. The 480 bighas land in question being a wakf land, it could not be included as the assessee s wealth for the assessment year in question. 11. The appeal filed by the department fails and is dismissed.
-
1983 (8) TMI 76 - ITAT ALLAHABAD-B
Excise Duty, High Court, Supreme Court ... ... ... ... ..... the excise authorities treated the demands as not pressed. So far as the notice dated 11-1-1983 is concerned, it was to the effect that by virtue of the Opium (U.P. Amendment) Act, 1982, the levy of excise duty declared illegal by the Hon ble High Court had been validated and that, accordingly, the Excise Commissioner had issued orders for the recovery of the duty payable with effect from 1-7-1969. The assessee was asked to deposit the same within a week. We can only say that it could not be treated as a fresh demand, but only by way of revival of the existing demands which were never cancelled or withdrawn by the excise authorities. Therefore, in whatever way the matter is looked at, we are of the view that the learned Commissioner (Appeals) was quite justified in taking the view that the additions made by the ITO for the assessment years in question were liable to be deleted. We uphold the same. 11. In the result, the appeals filed by the department fail and are dismissed.
....
|