|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 141 to 160 of 308 Records
-
1993 (9) TMI 174 - ITAT MADRAS-B
Income, Manufacturing And Marketing Of Cotton Yarn ... ... ... ... ..... ue. The position should remain the same even after 83-84. It seems that the assessing officer for the first time in the assessment year has reworked the written down value of labour quarters by deducting the initial depreciation allowed earlier. This is opposed to law and the grounds taken in this regard have adequate force. The appeal on this point is allowed in full. 28. As we see it, the CIT (A) has not passed a speaking order in this regard. It would appear that he was having in the back of his mind the amendment to section 32(1)(iv) made by the Finance Act, 1983. But he has not made any specific reference to the said amendment nor has he considered the legal consequences thereof. We, therefore, remit this aspect of the matter to the first appellate authority for fresh consideration and decision in accordance with law, and particularly in the light of the aforesaid amendment. 29. In the result, for statistical purposes the departmental appeal is treated as partly allowed.
-
1993 (9) TMI 173 - ITAT MADRAS-B
Deductions, Income From Co-Operative Societies ... ... ... ... ..... decline to interfere in the matter. 72. Finally, a word or two about the ITAT Cochin case of Quilon Central Coir Marketing Co-operative Society Ltd. referred to and relied upon by the assessees counsel. We have perused the said order. A rather short order, it does not contain the full facts of the case. It is, therefore, not possible for us to see whether the facts of the two cases before us are identical with those of the aforesaid Cochin case. Secondly, and more significantly, the said Cochin case proceeded on the basis of the common ground that the issue involved therein stood squarely governed by the decision of the Tribunal relied on by the CIT(A) and also in the case of Quilon Central Coir Marketing Co-op. Society Ltd. v. ITO, B-Ward, Quilon IT Appeal No. 79 (Coch.) of 1985, dated 11-8-1989 . In view of the foregoing, therefore, we hold that the said decision of the Tribunal cannot avail the assessees. 73. In the result, the appeals filed by the assessees are dismissed.
-
1993 (9) TMI 168 - ITAT INDORE
... ...
... ... ..... t shortage of 10.233 MT works out at 6.5 is slightly on the higher side and the material were lying at the Cochin port for about 2 months and the industrial acid oil was in drums, were in damaged condition as certified by the survey report is accepted while allowing the shortage at ship. The fact that there should have been higher amount of loss in transit in the case of second consignment cannot be wholly ruled out, looking at the condition of the drums in which the industrial acid oil was transported. However, since the assessee has no independent evidence to substantiate the loss of 10.233 MT, we direct the Assessing Officer to accept the loss of 5.233 MT as a transit shortage and in respect of balance 5 MT, transit shortage is directed to be disallowed for want of independent evidence in the matter, since the basis for the claim of this loss is only internal certificates of receipt of goods. The assessee gets partial relief. 6. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed.
-
1993 (9) TMI 167 - ITAT HYDERABAD-A
Deductions, Physical Disability, Deduction U/S 80U ... ... ... ... ..... tified to be permanently disabled by loss of 60 of his one limb. This, in my opinion, can be termed as substantial . This is what has been held by the Tribunal in the decisions referred to above. It may also be mentioned that the Board has issued a Circular No. 375 F.No. 178/17/83-IT (A-I)) allowing deduction under section 80U in certain circumstances, wherein also no further condition is prescribed to determine that the said disability or impairment of a limb should further be proved to be affecting substantially the capacity of a person to be gainfully employed. When a disability is of a particular extent, it is but natural that it affects substantially the capacity of a person to be gainfully employed. 8. In these circumstances, I am of the opinion that the DC (Appeals) was not justified in upholding the disallowance of the claim of the assessee and I direct the Assessing Officer to allow the claim of the assessee under section 80U. 9. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1993 (9) TMI 166 - ITAT HYDERABAD-A
Advance Tax, Interest Payable By Government, Refund, Interest On Refund ... ... ... ... ..... d to the credit of the assessee, that balance is treated as advance tax and the amount adjusted therefrom is treated as payment of tax. The assessee was entitled to interest under section 244(1A) on the amount so adjusted towards tax, if found refundable in pursuance of the appellate order or other proceedings. In this case also, the advance tax paid fell short of the demand raised under the original assessment order dated 21-3-1986. Therefore, it was adjusted only towards part of the tax demand. Thus, the tax paid was found to be refundable by virtue of the appellate order passed by the AAC as well as by the ITAT. Under the modificatory order dated 28-10-1989 therefore, the assessee is entitled to interest under section 244(1A). 6. The order of the Dy. Commissioner (Appeals), which is impugned before me is a perfectly justifiable order, and it does not call for any interference. 7. In the result, I find that there is no merit in the appeal of the Revenue and it is dismissed.
-
1993 (9) TMI 165 - ITAT DELHI-E
Expenditure Tax Act ... ... ... ... ..... at for a customer the charge levied by a hotel is the entire amount of the gross bill, which includes not only the room charges, the taxes levied but also the food, drinks and other services provided by the hotel, including Sona Bath, Secretarial services, health club, taxies etc. but all of them are not to be included as forming part of the room charges. For the customer the entire amount is a charge. Therefore the argument that as to how a customer views the charge, meaning the gross amount of the bill, cannot be pressed into service as an aid to interpret the room charges. 15. On a consideration of these, we are of the opinion that the Revenue does not seem to be right in applying the provisions of the Expenditure Tax Act to the assessee by including the luxury tax in the room charges. We therefore set aside the assessments in all the three years and hold that the assessee is not liable to pay the expenditure tax. 16. In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed.
-
1993 (9) TMI 164 - ITAT DELHI-D
Business Expenditure, Allowability of ... ... ... ... ..... that, the export order matured, is clearly belied by the fact that, in the letter sent by the assessee-company to that party dated5-3-83, the assessee had stated that, Mr. Erry, its General Manager is already familiar withNigeriaand Chellarams inKano. This letter rather shows that the assessee is well familiar withNigeriaand the Chellarams atKanoand that they do not require any assistance from theBombayparty. The Bombay High Court in Goodlas Nerolac Paints Ltd. s case had categorically observed that, payment is no criteria for allowing deduction, when it could not be established that, it was in connection with the business and has been so incurred wholly and exclusively for the purposes of the business. We are therefore of the confirmed opinion that theBombayparty had not rendered any service that would entitle it for any commission and accordingly confirm the disallowance. In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed in part, while that of the department, dismissed.
-
1993 (9) TMI 163 - ITAT DELHI-C
... ...
... ... ..... w. We may also observed that, the assessee had never advanced any reasonable cause for not filing the returns for any of those assessment years. We are therefore, of the opinion that, the Expln. 3 was rightly invoked by the Assessing Officer and since the assessee satisfies all of the conditions prescribed therein and that too cumulatively, the conclusion that the assessee is deemed to have concealed particulars of income is the only possible effect and therefore, penalty was rightly levied for all of the assessment years under appeal. The order of the CIT(A) is accordingly set aside as it is not according to the intention and the spirit of the law makers. 16. The various case laws relied upon by the appellant are not applicable since, none of them were concerning the Expln. 3 to s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. We therefore, uphold the levy of penalty for deemed concealment of income for all of the four asst. yrs. 1980-81 to 1983-84. The appeals are allowed in favour of the Revenue.
-
1993 (9) TMI 162 - ITAT DELHI-C
For Concealment Of Income ... ... ... ... ..... fide exercise of the right to interpret the Act. The facts of this case demonstrate that the assessee had with very great care, caution and good faith submitted an explanation, which is bona fide, made alternative claims disclosing at all times all the necessary materials. There was neither negligence nor deliberateness in the claims made. Disregarding this important aspect it is not proper and fair to still hold that the assessee was guilty of concealment of income all because the explanation offered by the assessee was not found to be acceptable. Such a situation does not warrant the levy of penalty for concealment of income besides the legal authorities we have mentioned in assessee s own case for assessment years 1984-85 and 1985-86 in support of our conclusion. 9. In view of our above discussion, we are of the opinion that penalty levied in the given facts and circumstances is illegal and invalid. We, therefore, cancel the same. 10. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1993 (9) TMI 161 - ITAT DELHI-C
Valuation Of Assets, Immovable Property ... ... ... ... ..... IT(A) had evaluated the property by adopting the most ideally suited method of valuation which has been accepted by the various Courts because the property is fully tenanted, the yield therefrom was fully known and therefore the true value could be arrived only by rent capitalisation. We accordingly confirm the order. 10. In the case of Shri Shanker Saran one other aspect is allowing of deduction under section 5(1)(iv) in regard of the property. In regard to this claim, the deduction has to be allowed at the option of the assessee, irrespective of the fact that whether the property is owned by the assessee or is included by virtue of his share in the firm. 11. The claim of estate duty liability and initiation of penalty proceedings in fact has not been pressed. However, we may state that the penalty proceedings are independent and they misplaced in the present appeal. 12. In the result, the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed while that of the Department are dismissed.
-
1993 (9) TMI 160 - ITAT DELHI-C
Business Connection, Business Income, Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement, Estimated Income, Expenditure Incurred, Fees For Technical Services, Foreign Company, Income Deemed To Accrue Or Arise In India, Income From Business, Indian Company, Permanent Establishment, Set Off Of Loss
-
1993 (9) TMI 159 - ITAT DELHI-B
Penalty For Concealment, Concealment Of Income ... ... ... ... ..... nch 3. Kama Commercial 271(1)(c) Penalties cancelled by Pvt. Ltd. Morarji Bai 273(2)(b) ITAT. 5867 and Desai Gramonati 5868/Del/88 Trust. A.Y. 1983-84 A Bench. Order dated 10-12-1992. 4. K.S. Kalra Ramakrishna 271(1)(c) Penalties cancelled by and Sons (HUF) Mission Regional I.T.A.T. ITA No. 5864/ Institute of Del/88 Graphic Arts. Order dated 30-9-1992 A.Y. 1983-84 A Bench 5. K.S. Kalra Ramakrishna 271(1)(c) Penalties cancelled (Ind.) Mission by I.T.A.T. ITA No. 5866/ Del/88 Order dated 30-9-1992 A.Y. 1983-84 A Bench. 6. Varun Hastimal 216 Interest delected following Enterprises Sancheti Usha and Inalsa Orders. ITA No. 925/ Memorial Del/89 Trust. Order dated 30-11-1992 A.Y. 1984-85 D Bench 7. N.R. Dongre Ramakrishna 143(3) Deduction allowed ITA No. 2420/ Mission. Del/88 Order dated 13-1-1992 A.Y. 1983-84 B Bench. 8. Usha Inter- Aparna 216 Interest deleted by national Ltd. Ashram holding that donation was ITA No. 1544/ genuine. Del/88. A.Y. 1984-85 A Bench. Order dated 5-8-1991
-
1993 (9) TMI 158 - ITAT DELHI-B
Double Taxation Relief, Agreement With Foreign Countries ... ... ... ... ..... ejected. 8. The claim of investment allowance on the machineries added in the year does not arise out of the order of the CIT(A) and therefore, it is rejected. The levy of interest under sections 139(8) and 217 of the Act have been stated to be consequential, and therefore, we direct the assessing officer to recalculate the same while giving effect to this order. 9. In the departments appeal for the assessment years 1983-84 and 1985-86, it has challenged the order of CIT(A), where he had held that, the income arising to the assessee from Libya on its construction business carried on in that country, is taxable only in that country. Since, the identical aspect was examined in the appeal of the assessee for the assessment year 1984-85 and the same conclusion would hold good for the assessment years 1983-84 and 1985-86, we reverse the order of CIT(A) for these two assessment years. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is rejected, while the department s appeals are allowed.
-
1993 (9) TMI 157 - ITAT DELHI
Discontinued Business, Assessment Of ... ... ... ... ..... diture relating to arbitration was not deductible. The Tribunal however, held that expenditure relating to arbitration was deductible and the income alone was assessable under section 176(3A). On a reference, the Hon ble High Court held that for computing the income of the assessee for the purposes of assessment of tax under the Act, the expenditure was necessarily to be excluded from the amount that was received by the assessee and the view taken by the Tribunal was justified and that no question of law arose from it. 7. The decision of the CIT (A) in allowing expenditure in respect of the awarded sum in the case of the assessee being in consonance with the decision of the Rajasthan High Court in the case of Foresole Ltd., we uphold the same and decline to interfere. 8. In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed. 9. The cross-objection filed by the assessee is merely supporting the order of CIT(A). No separate relief has been sought. The same is accordingly dismissed.
-
1993 (9) TMI 156 - ITAT COCHIN
Penalty, For Concealment Of Income ... ... ... ... ..... may be treated as accidental having regard to the late completion of the construction. In this view of the matter, we hold that no penalty is leviable on the above two additions. 35. For the assessment year 1980-81, penalty was levied on the following items (i) Income from toddy business in Alwaye Range Rs. 1,00,822(ii) Income from Archana Jewellery Rs. 1,38,348(iii) Share income of minor children Rs. 13,333 The above additions were made substantially for the same reasons mentioned in the appeal for the assessment year 1979-80 and we have already discussed in great detail that even though these additions were sustained in the quantum appeal, no case has been made out by the revenue to show that the assessee has concealed the income or the particulars of such income and it was held that the department has not discharged the onus on its part in the penalty proceedings. We adopt the same reasoning for the assessment year 1980-81 also. 36. In the result, the appeals are allowed.
-
1993 (9) TMI 155 - ITAT COCHIN
... ...
... ... ..... x Court would appear to have the effect of placing an inherent limitation on the powers of the Commissioner in the domain of revisional jurisdiction under section 263 of the IT Act in respect of matters which have reached their finality in the original assessment and left undisturbed in the reassessment. In this view of the matter, we hold that the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax under section 263 for the assessment year 1983-84 having been passed on 20-2-1989 is barred by limitation as the original assessment for this year stood completed by 31-1-1986. The order under section 263 for the assessment year 1984-85 was passed within the time allowed under section 263(2) of the IT Act, such order having been passed on 20-2-1989, in relation to the original order of assessment dated 23-7-1986. Thus, we uphold the contention of the assessee for the first year and reject his contention for the second year on the issue of limitation. 7. In the result, the appeals are allowed.
-
1993 (9) TMI 154 - ITAT COCHIN
Firm, Registration, Powers of ... ... ... ... ..... wife are partners. The Dy. CIT(Appeals) besides holding that the firm is not a-genuine one, had directed the Income-tax Officer to include the entire income in the personal assessment of Sri George Varghese, to which exception is taken by the appellant. Though the scope of the power of CIT(Appeals) is co-terminus with that of the Income-tax Officer and he can do whatever the Income-tax Officer can do or did not do, such powers can be exercised only with regard to the subject-matter of appeal and also with regard to the appellant and not with regard to any other person who was not in appeal before him. Therefore, his direction to the Income-tax Officer to assess the income in its entirety in the hands of Sri George Varghese, who was not the appellant before the Dy. CIT(Appeals) has no legal legs to stand upon. The same is vacated. 7. In the result, the order of the Dy. CIT (Appeals) is set aside and the Income-tax Officer is directed to grant registration to the assessee-firm.
-
1993 (9) TMI 153 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
Appellate Tribunal, Business Disallowance, Depreciation, Method Of Accounting, Allowance of ... ... ... ... ..... ned, was accepted and since there was no truth in the allegation made by the IAC that certain cash sales were suppressed, I find no justification at all to reject the turnover of scrap merely for the reason that it happened to be lower than the previous year, ignoring the fact that in subsequent years, it was much higher. 24. Another fact to be noticed was that the selling rate of the scrap has gone down from Rs. 1,800 in the previous year to Rs. 1,600 in this year which was not doubted. When the selling rate has thus gone down by Rs. 200 per ton, there is bound to be reduction in the total sale value. There is, therefore, no justification for the addition of any amount under this head. I accept the view of the learned Accountant Member in deleting the entire addition as against the view of the learned Judicial Member to sustain a part of the addition at Rs. 2 lacs. 25. The matter will now go before the regular Bench for disposal of appeal in accordance with majority opinion.
-
1993 (9) TMI 152 - ITAT CALCUTTA-E
Income, Assessable As, Business Income ... ... ... ... ..... of its paid-up share capital. It is clear from the above that the Surtax Act also regards the share premium account as forming part of the paid-up share capital of the company. Schedule VI to the Companies Act which contains the form of balance sheet in Part I thereof also indicates that the share premium account has to be shown as reserve under the head Reserves and surplus in the liability side of the balance sheet. 12. Having regard to the aforesaid legal position, we are of the view that the share premium amount cannot be treated as income of the assessee. It does not arise out of any trading transaction of the company. It relates to the capital structure of the company and has to, therefore, be treated as a capital receipt not liable to tax. 13. For the aforesaid reasons we allow ground Nos. 2 and 3 and hold that the amounts of Rs. 1,83,000 and Rs. 1,48,000 should be excluded from the total income of the assessee-company. 14. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed.
-
1993 (9) TMI 151 - ITAT CALCUTTA-E
Assessee-Company ... ... ... ... ..... ome of the assessee, on a specific question being raised before the High Court by means of an additional question which is extracted at page 359 of the report. Even assuming that the rental income from the properties other than the Tivoli Park property was wrongly assessed under the head business and should have been properly assessed only under the head property , the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Cocananda Radhaswami Bank Ltd. followed by the Calcutta High Court in the case of New India Investment Corpn. Ltd., are directly in favour of the assessees contentions. Whichever way the matter is looked at, it is clear that the assessee is entitled to the deduction of the interest payable on the outstanding municipal taxes. We, therefore, accept the contentions of the assessee in the appeals. The order of the CIT for the assessment year 1984-85 is cancelled. The order of the CIT (A) for the assessment year 1988-89 is reversed. In the result, the appeals are allowed.
............
|
