|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 141 to 160 of 354 Records
-
1990 (8) TMI 233 - ITAT PUNE
Unexplained Money ... ... ... ... ..... f the aforesaid wealth--tax assessments relied on by the learned counsel for the assessee, the point of difference gets dissolved. The jewellery is taken to have been in existence on 31-3-1983. If that be so, then no addition can be made in the assessment year 1984-85 for jewellery having been acquired out of undisclosed income. It, therefore, follows that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, I have to agree with the Judicial Member that the addition of Rs. 79,950 being the value of gold jewellery of 406.9 grams was not justified in the assessment of AEL and the addition of Rs. 39,975 being the value of gold jewellery of 203.5 grams was not justified in the assessment of MAL in so far as the assessment year 1984-85 is concerned for which the points of difference, have been referred to me. 12. The points of difference are answered accordingly and the case will now go back to the Bench for passing consequential order in accordance with the opinion of the majority.
-
1990 (8) TMI 230 - ITAT PUNE
Accounting Year, Business Expenditure, Purchase Price, Revenue Expenditure, State Financial Corporation
-
1990 (8) TMI 227 - ITAT NAGPUR
Carrying On Business, Penalty Proceedings ... ... ... ... ..... house property. Since this part of the income was declared for the first time in the revised return, it clearly tantamounted to an unequivocal admission of concealment. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) was, therefore, fully justified in upholding this part of the penalty in relation to the assessment year 1982-83. 13. As a result of the above discussion, we hold that the impugned order of the learned Commissioner (Appeals), whereby he cancelled the penalties in full for the assessment years 1978-79 to 1981-82, cannot be sustained. Similarly that part of the impugned order whereby the assessee s appeal was partly allowed also cannot be upheld. We, therefore, allow the five departmental appeals and quash the impugned order of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) whereby he cancelled the penalties under section 27(1)(c) for the five years in question. The assessee s appeal for the assessment year 1982-83 shall stand dismissed. The ITO s orders for all the five years are restored
-
1990 (8) TMI 226 - ITAT NAGPUR
Agricultural Development Allowance, Association Of Persons, Co-operative Society, Deduction In Respect, Expenditure Incurred, Weighted Deduction
-
1990 (8) TMI 223 - ITAT MADRAS-D
Accounting Year, Charitable Institution, Deductions In Respect, Earned Income, From Other Sources, Long-term Capital Gains
-
1990 (8) TMI 222 - ITAT MADRAS-D
Actual Cost, Foreign Company, Investment Allowance, S. 13 ... ... ... ... ..... necessary to-bring the asset into existence. In other words, if there is a nexus between the machinery and this penalty, then it would become part of the cost of the capital asset Looking at it from the point of view of normal rules of accountancy prevailing in commerce and industry as advised by the Supreme Court, we are convinced that this penalty also was only with reference to the importation of the goods and shall have, necessarily, to be taken into account as part of the actual cost of asset. In this view it is unnecessary to consider the alternate contention of the assessee that if this amount cannot be capitalised, it should be allowed as expenditure laid out for the purpose of business. 10. We are, therefore, of the considered opinion that the sum of Rs. 71,500 must be included in computing the actual cost of the machinery imported by the assessee and the assessee is entitled to depreciation and investment allowance on the total amount. 11. The appeals are dismissed
-
1990 (8) TMI 219 - ITAT MADRAS-B
... ...
... ... ..... ercised reasonably. It is implicit in the concept of judicial discretion that it includes a duty to be impartial and not to discriminate on unacceptable grounds. We find that the Revenue did not dispute the proposition that r. 1BB applies to a company as in the case of B.P. Indian Agencies Joint Enterprises Ltd. the only point in dispute was whether standard rent should be taken as the net maintainable rent for the purpose of r. 1BB in assessing the value of the property belonging to a company. In the present case, the Commissioner(A) in his very elaborate order has referred to this case which was cited by the assessee and also to the circulars of the CBDT explaining the provisions and operation of s. 40 of the Finance Act, 1983. In the circumstances, the direction given by the Commissioner to file an appeal in the case of the present assessee is clearly discriminatory and untenable and not maintainable. We, therefore, refuse to entertain this appeal. The appeal is dismissed.
-
1990 (8) TMI 216 - ITAT MADRAS-B
Business Expenditure, Deduction In Respect, In Part ... ... ... ... ..... ct of the guarantee money u/s. 37(1) of the IT Act, 1961. We fail to see the rationale behind this argument. In cases where a claim for revenue deduction is made on the basis of a provision made as respects a legally enforceable (and not a mere contingent) liability, the matter is always examined in the context of Sec. 37(1) and even Sec. 28 of the Act. We have held that the provision in respect of the sum of Rs. 5,36,672 relates to a contingent liability and is hence not revenue deductible. If the sum is not revenue deductible, it cannot be allowed either u/s. 37(1) or even u/s. 28 of the Act. Hence, we reject the fourth proposition also. 57. In view of the foregoing, therefore, we hold that the CIT(Appeals) was not justified in allowing the assessee s claim for revenue deduction in respect of the sum of Rs. 5,36,672. We, therefore, set aside the order of the CIT(A) on this issue and restore that of the assessing officer. 58. In the result, the departmental appeal is allowed
-
1990 (8) TMI 215 - ITAT MADRAS-B
Deemed Gift, Market Value, Winding Up ... ... ... ... ..... when the trusts were created. Secondly, whether the creation of the trusts to discharge the debt provided adequate security depended upon the value of the shares transferred to the trusts and the income which was expected to arise therefrom and the possibility of the debts being discharged thereby. There is nothing on record to show that even at the inception the trusts did not provide adequate security for the discharge of the debts. In the circumstances this alternative plea of the revenue also cannot be entertained. 8. For the assessment year 1981-82 the assessee had written off another amount of Rs. 1,07,187 due from Dr. Radha Thiagarajan. It is not in dispute that this debt had become barred by limitation and in the circumstances the assessee was justified in writing off this debt also. 9. Therefore, the CGT(Appeals) was fight in cancelling the assessment of the deemed gift which did not arise from the facts of the case. His order is confirmed. The appeals are dismissed
-
1990 (8) TMI 210 - ITAT MADRAS-A
Income Tax Act ... ... ... ... ..... assessee trust, as was done under the original assessments passed by the Wealth-tax Officer, is quite justifiable, and it cannot be said that the assessments are vitiated by any error and therefore they cannot be held to be prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. We, therefore set aside the common revisionary order of the Commissioner for these four assessment years and the original assessments made by Wealth-tax Officer for each of these four assessment years are restored. Since the very basis on which the fresh assessments were framed was knocked out the fresh assessments made for each of these four years cannot be valid. However, we may add that since the assessee already succeeded in the first batch of the four appeals and since the original assessments were restored, the appeals wising out of the fresh assessments for these assessment years become unnecessary. In the result WTA Nos. 114 to 117 (Mds)/1989 are allowed and WTA Nos. 1510 to 1513 (Mds)/1989 are dismissed
-
1990 (8) TMI 209 - ITAT MADRAS-A
Profits In Lieu, Refund Of Tax, Tax At Source ... ... ... ... ..... section 263 enables the Commissioner of Income-tax to revise the orders of the Income-tax Officer, it confers a discretionary power which has to be exercised reasonably. It is implicit in the concept of judicial discretion that it includes a duty to be impartial and not to discriminate on unacceptable grounds (See de Smith s Judicial Review of Administrative Action, 4th Edition, p. 346). In the present case, the order of the Commissioner is clearly discriminatory since it seeks to tax this assessee alone on a class of receipt which has been accepted as not taxable in the hands of other assessees. Besides, in the absence of any decision of the Supreme Court or any High Court taking a contrary view, an order of assessment which is in conformity with the order of the Tribunal holding that such a class of receipt is not taxable cannot be regarded as erroneous in law. Hence for both these reasons the order of the Commissioner is untenable and is cancelled. 6. The appeal is allowed
-
1990 (8) TMI 208 - ITAT MADRAS-A
Annual Value, Borrowed Capital, Income From House Property, Income From Other Sources, Rental Income
-
1990 (8) TMI 204 - ITAT HYDERABAD-B
Tribunal's Order ... ... ... ... ..... irement is concerned according to the Andhra Pradesh High Court whose decision is binding against us being jurisdictional High Court is that no notice of hearing need be given to the assessee when the order does not have the effect of increasing the tax, reducing the refund or enhancing the assessment, with great respect to the Delhi High Court the first condition is not essential condition under law. Regarding the second condition we are of the opinion that we have substantially complied with the same inasmuch as we have assigned reasons in our orders dated 6-10-1989 as to why the Tribunal is rejecting the miscellaneous petition. 8. Therefore, in our view the present miscellaneous petition is not maintainable and we further hold that the orders of the Tribunal dated 6-10-1989 rejecting the miscellaneous petition dated 21-9-1989 filed by the assessee is perfectly valid order and it does not represent any mistake apparent from record. 9. In the result the petition is dismissed
-
1990 (8) TMI 203 - ITAT HYDERABAD
Charitable Purpose ... ... ... ... ..... ssessee to exemption. For the aforesaid reason and on an analysis of the activities of the Corporation in the light of the various judicial pronouncements, we have come to the conclusion that the activities are charitable in nature within the meaning of section 2(15) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and on this point, therefore, we differ from the conclusion arrived at by the Judicial Member. In other words, we agree with the conclusion of the Accountant Member that the assessee Corporation is a charitable institution within the meaning of section 2(15) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. In view of the aforesaid position, point No. 3 of the difference of opinion which was referred to us has to be answered in the affirmative, namely, that the A.P. State Civil Supplies Corporation is a charitable institution within the meaning of section 2(15) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 33. The case will now go back to the Bench for disposing of the appeal in accordance with the opinion of the majority.
-
1990 (8) TMI 202 - ITAT GAUHATI
High Court, Reference Application ... ... ... ... ..... he appeals before the Appellate Tribunal were disposed of earlier, the Appellate Tribunal would continue to have its inherent jurisdiction and statutory powers of stay of the collection of the demand or re-assessment proceedings. But we have indicated above that we have already heard the parties on the Reference Application matters also. Vide our separate order we have declined to make reference of the questions as the same are, in the opinion of the Tribunal, not questions of law. 6. Thus, as things stand now, there is no matter pending before the Appellate Tribunal or a reference being pending before the Hon ble High Court on the points dealt with by us in the preceding paragraphs. In the circumstances and in the context of the ratio enunciated by the Hon ble Supreme Court, as stated above, and also as held by the Hon ble Bombay High Court, the stay petitions preferred by the assessee in the present cases cannot be accepted. 7. In the result, the Stay Petitions are rejected
-
1990 (8) TMI 201 - ITAT GAUHATI
Assessment Order, Original Assessment ... ... ... ... ..... as the assessee had not been treated as defaulter nor recovery proceeding was started. 16. As indicated earlier, the Nagpur Bench of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has held on the facts of that case that omission to sign the return by the assessee concerned is only a clerical omission and did not invalidate the return as such. We are also of the view in the present context of the dispute before us that notice served on the which was not signed by the ITO, would not invalidate the notice as such. The notice is, therefore, valid in view of the statutory provision of section 292B. In fact, the assessee has not been misled by the unsigned notice as it, in fact, had filed an appeal before the CIT(A). From whatever angle we may look at the issue, we find that the CIT(A), on the facts of the case, and on the materials available has rightly held that the notice was valid. His order is, therefore, sustained. 17. In the result, the appeal by the assessee on the points are dismissed
-
1990 (8) TMI 200 - ITAT DELHI-E
... ...
... ... ..... s stands incurred when the tickets ae purchased or it is incurred when the tickets are actually utilised by performing the journey. The view which anyone would reasonably take is that the expenditure stands incurred as soon as the tickets are purchased. Even if a view as canvassed by the Revenue is possible that would make the point merely arguable and it cannot be said that other views that was canvassed by the assessee and that was accepted by the ITO was so erroneous as to amount to a mistake apparent from the record. Therefore, in allowing the expenditure there did not come about on record a mistake that was apparent and that the ITO could rectify under s. 154. 9. For the reasons discussed above, we are of the opinion that the expenditure in question is rightly allowed by the ITO in the assessment order and there was no mistake that could be rectified under s. 154. The appeal is, therefore, allowed and the order passed by the ITO under s. 154 of the Act is hereby quashed.
-
1990 (8) TMI 199 - ITAT DELHI-E
Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement, Double Taxation Relief ... ... ... ... ..... , in our opinion, the assessee cannot succeed. That is because the assessee being a non-resident, can be assessed only on accrual basis in respect of the income accruing fromIndia. The Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. Standard Triumph Motor Co. Ltd. 1979 119 ITR 573, had held that, in the case of a non-resident, the cash system of accounting would not be available to them and income accruing will have to be taxed on the point of accrual. This is the only decision on this point and no contrary decision has been given by any High Court. Under these circumstances, we will hold that the assessee s submission regarding cash system is not acceptable. 11. The third point, i.e., the quantum of deduction admissible, was not argued seriously before us. In any case, the findings of the ITO that the amount payable to Combata Aviation (P.) Ltd. is not relateable to the collection of foreign travel tax, is a reasonable finding. 12. In the result, the Departmental Appeals are allowed
-
1990 (8) TMI 198 - ITAT DELHI-E
Chief Commissioner, Tribunal's Order ... ... ... ... ..... se cases, therefore, did not deal with a case like the one before us and there is, therefore, no question of any divergent opinion and no need for making a reference to any larger Bench. 9. We are in agreement with the view taken by the Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Dalmia Dairy Industries Ltd. and following the reasonings given therein, which have been reproduced above, we hold that limitation in these cases would not count from the date when the copies of the orders were delivered at the office of the Chief Commissioner and would, on the other hand, count from the date when the Chief Commissioner, in compliance with a request contained in the aforesaid, letters of the Tribunal, served the copies of the orders on the Commissioner concerned. From such dates admittedly the applications in question are within limitation. We, therefore, over-rule the office objection as well as the objection raised by the assessee-respondent and hold that the applications are within time
-
1990 (8) TMI 197 - ITAT DELHI-E
Appeal To CIT(A), Appellate Assistant Commissioner, Interest On Refund ... ... ... ... ..... t of orders passed in appeal or other proceedings under the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal s order in the case of Oriental Fire and Gen. Insurance Co. Ltd., though not detailed, supports our view and we have attempted to show that for the reasons discussed above, the view taken by the revenue is not at all plausible and permissible. Therefore, there was a mistake in the order dated 18-12-1980 passed by the assessing officer, inasmuch as he failed to grant interest to the assessee on the sum of Rs. 1,70,130 to which the assessee was entitled in terms of sec. 244(1A). The assessee s application dated12-1-1981under sec. 154 was, therefore, liable to be allowed. 10. We, therefore, allow the assessee s appeal and setting aside the orders of the authorities below we allow the assessee s application dated 12-1-1981 under sec. 154 and direct the assessing officer to amend his order dated 18-12-1980 so as to allow the assessee interest under sec. 244(1A) on the sum of Rs. 1,70,130
............
|
