|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 161 to 180 of 226 Records
-
1992 (10) TMI 66 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Depreciation, Higher Depreciation On Motor Buses ... ... ... ... ..... the business of running the vehicles on hire. The concept of business involves some kind of regularity in the activity involved in the business. Stray incidents of hiring out idle lorries cannot be brought within this provision because the assessee herein was engaged in the business of manufacturing timber in connection with which the lorries were being used. The dominant activity of the assessee will have to be considered to find out as to whether the particular claim would fall within the provision referred to above. In view of the specific finding that the lorries were regularly employed for the business of the assessee of manufacturing plywood and the lorries were hired out only on a few limited occasions, the Revenue is justified in rejecting the claim of the assessee under the above provision of item III-E(1A) of Part I of Appendix 1. The question referred to us is, accordingly, answered in the affirmative and against the assessee. References are answered accordingly.
-
1992 (10) TMI 65 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Accounting, Appeal To Tribunal ... ... ... ... ..... ctual question involved in the appeal, but has trenched upon the power exercisable by the Income-tax Officer under section 145(1) of the Act which was not the subject-matter of the appeal. Moreover, the Income-tax Officer s action in adding back the difference in the closing and opening stock for computation of valuation is not traceable to the exercise of his power under section 145(1) of the Act. The stand taken on behalf of the assessee is, therefore, well-founded. Nothing is pointed out by the Tribunal as to how the method of accounting by the assessee leads to escapement of taxation justifying the Income-tax Officer s action in rejecting the assessee s changed method of accounting. The Tribunal has, therefore, erred in proceeding on the assumption that the Income-tax Officer had proceeded under section 145(1) of the Act in rejecting the assessee s claim. In the view we have taken above, the answer to the question referred is in the negative and in favour of the assessee.
-
1992 (10) TMI 64 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... en the assessment was made on the basis of the returns filed. In the present case, the Tribunal was right in coming to the conclusion that the order of the Income-tax Officer was not prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue and, therefore, action under section 263 was not called for. It is contended by Shri Rajendra that the returns for the years 1982-83 and 1983-84 were antedated. We are unable to accept this contention for the simple reason that no such submission was made on behalf of the Department before the Income-tax Tribunal when the appeal was filed against the order passed under section 263. Furthermore, even the Commissioner of Income-tax has not given any such finding. In the absence of any finding in this behalf we cannot accept a bald assertion on the part of the Revenue. The fact that such an averment has been made in the application under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act is not relevant. We find no merit in this petition. The same is dismissed as such.
-
1992 (10) TMI 63 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Application To Proceedings, High Court ... ... ... ... ..... initiated in pursuance of notice under section 269D should be pending. No such proceeding is pending in this case. The proceedings were over long ago resulting in the order passed by the competent authority on March 31, 1981. What is more, even the first appeal was disposed of by the Appellate Tribunal on October 31, 1981, and the appeal filed by the Revenue as early as on January 21, 1982, is pending in this court. Pendency of the proceedings before the competent authority is necessary for the applicability of the circular. No such proceedings are pending before the competent authority. We are of the view that Circular No. 455, dated May 16, 1986, has no application to the present case. Since the circular itself has no application, the binding nature of the circular does not arise for consideration and so we decline to adjudicate the said question. We decline to answer the question referred to the Full Bench. The matter will be posted before the Division Bench for hearing.
-
1992 (10) TMI 62 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... y to the unit of the assessee as a joint family. It is not possible for us to accept this submission. A copy of the will produced before us (translated into English) shows that the testator bequeathed the properties specifically to named persons and the assessee was one such named person. No property was bequeathed in favour of any unit treating it as a Hindu undivided family. The will nowhere expressed any intention to bequeath the property to any branch of the family which would continue as a Hindu undivided family. Therefore, it is clear that the assessee obtained the property as his separate property and consequently, income therefrom will be his individual property. Before concluding, we may also refer to a decision of this court in CIT v. Nagarathnamma 1970 76 ITR 352 which also had taken a view similar to the view expressed by the Supreme Court in Chander Sen s case 1986 161 ITR 370. In the result, the reference is answered in the affirmative and against the assessee.
-
1992 (10) TMI 61 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Business Expenditure, Fines And Penalties ... ... ... ... ..... loss which a trader has to bear. The law does not expect the infringement thereof and infringements are not incidental or ancillary to business which is carried on by a businessman. The requirement of section 37 of the Income-tax Act is that the expenditure must be laid out or expended wholly and exclusively for the purposes of business to be allowed as a deduction. The expenditure in respect of a penalty cannot be considered to be laid out or expended wholly and exclusively for the purposes of business. In these circumstances, we are of the view that the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the entire amount paid by the assessee to the Sales Tax Department cannot be allowed as a deduction in respect of penalty under section 16(1)j) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act while computing its total income for the relevant accounting year. Accordingly, the reference is answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. The Revenue would be entitled to costs of Rs. 300.
-
1992 (10) TMI 60 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Other Sources, Property ... ... ... ... ..... comes a new kind of income, not covered by section 9, that is, income not from the ownership of the building alone but an income which though arising from a building would not have arisen if the plant, machinery and furniture had not also been let along with it. In case there is inseparability, as stated above, then it will not be income from house property at all but would be income falling under the present section 56(2)(iii). Further, what follows from this is that in case of separability, the two sets of income attributable to the two separate entities also should be assessed under the respective heads. In other words, the income that should be attributed to the property as such alone should be assessed under section 22. In view of the above discussion, we have no hesitation in holding that the composite rent received by the assessee could be split up in the instant case and, consequently, the question referred to us is answered in the affirmative and against the Revenue.
-
1992 (10) TMI 59 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... e period prior to December 15, 1977, from the contracting parties, it could only have been for and on behalf of the State Government and as agent of the State Government. The order of the Income-tax Officer itself would indicate that going by the accounts of the Corporation, this amount had been handed over to the State Government. In these circumstances, there is no illegality in the finding of the Tribunal that the receipt of Rs. 24,02,920.43 by the Corporation was as agent of the State Government and that this amount or any fraction thereof could not be treated as income of the Corporation for the relevant assessment year and is not to be assessed in the hands of the assessee. In the result, we answer the question in the affirmative, that is, in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. A copy of this judgment and order under the seal of this High Court and the signature of the Registrar will be forwarded to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Gauhati Bench, Gauhati.
-
1992 (10) TMI 58 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Change In Method Of Valuation Of Stock, Molasses Storage Fund, Sugar Industry ... ... ... ... ..... ming that section 145 is attracted to the facts of the case, under which the Income-tax Officer has power to determine the true income, this power is subject to scrutiny by the appellate authority who has found the method followed by the assessee quite reasonable in the circumstances. The Appellate Tribunal has given a definite finding that the new method has been derived for the purpose of reflecting the correct income. In other words, the ultimate fact-finding authority has found the method adopted by the assessee as resulting in disclosing the true picture of the assessee s profits and loss. In the view we have taken, it is unnecessary to consider the decision of this court in CIT v. Corporation Bank Ltd. 1988 174 ITR 616, cited by Sri Ramabhadran, learned counsel for the assessee. Consequently, we answer the second question in the affirmative and against the Revenue. In the result, both the questions are answered against the Revenue. The reference is answered accordingly.
-
1992 (10) TMI 57 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Appeal To AAC, Precedents ... ... ... ... ..... ence if it was a competent order did not, therefore, arise for consideration before the Tribunal. The respondent is, therefore, entitled to raise the point as it is comprehended within the question referred. Therefore, even though the Department succeeds on the question of law, it has to fail on the question of limitation. We, therefore, hold that an order charging interest under section 215 can be passed separately, apart from the assessment, but within the period prescribed for the assessment under section 153. But the order, annexure A, in this case is invalid as one passed beyond that period. The Revenue wins on the question of law but the assessee wins the case. We, therefore, answer the question referred in the affirmative, that is, in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. There will be no order as to costs. A copy of this judgment, under the seal of this court and the signature of the Registrar, will be sent to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench.
-
1992 (10) TMI 56 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Appeal To Tribunal, Exemptions, Wealth Tax ... ... ... ... ..... as the Tribunal and the authorities below it, the attention of none was directed towards the real points in controversy. In such a situation and on account of the fact that the question is of considerable importance since it affects the entire gem industry in this area, it will be appropriate to require the Tribunal to decide the matter afresh after giving both the sides an opportunity to produce further material, if they so desire (at page 268). In such a situation, the question being of considerable importance being based on the facts and circumstances of the case required to be decided by the Tribunal. In fact, the question of law does not arise out of the Tribunal s order as there is no finding of fact and it is not possible to decide the question of applicability of the statutory provisions of which the assessee has claimed the benefits. In this view of the matter, we decline to answer the question and require the Tribunal to decide the matter afresh as indicated above.
-
1992 (10) TMI 55 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Exemptions, HUF, Wealth Tax ... ... ... ... ..... rties, transactions and objects for the imposition of a levy and for that purpose classify as many different assessable units as it could reasonably think necessary and this is how three assessable units, namely, individual , Hindu undivided family and company (which was later omitted ) have come to be specified in section 3. In our view, the specific mention of a Hindu undivided family in the section does not result in the exclusion of a group of individuals who only form a unit by reason of their birth like Mappilla tarward from the operation of the section. It is difficult to accept the argument that if the term individual was intended to include joint families or undivided families it was redundant to specify Hindu undivided families. The above observation supports the contention of learned counsel for the assessee. In the result, we agree with the conclusion of the Appellate Tribunal and the question referred to us is answered in the affirmative and against the Revenue.
-
1992 (10) TMI 54 - PATNA HIGH COURT
Company, Directors, Salary ... ... ... ... ..... present purpose. While considering the provisions of section 40A(5) and the Explanation thereto, their Lordships have made certain observations without addressing themselves to the provisions of the Act, which are being considered in the present case. The other decision in the case of CIT v. Hindustan Housing and Land Development Trust Ltd. 1986 161 ITR 524 (SC), relied on by Mr. Chatterji deals with an entirely different situation and is of no assistance in the present case. Keeping in view the discussions made above, I am of the opinion that the amount in question is liable to be assessed under the head Salaries in the hands of the assessee. Accordingly, the question referred to this court is being answered in the negative, i.e., against the assessee and in favour of the Department. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Let a copy of this judgment be transmitted to the Assistant Registrar of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, A Bench, Patna. AFTAB ALAM J. -I agree.
-
1992 (10) TMI 53 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Developement Rebate ... ... ... ... ..... aim, development rebate and then it took the view that the new firm which wanted development rebate, was not the assessee which had installed the new machinery and plant the assessee which had done so was different and, therefore, the new firm was not entitled to any development rebate in respect of the machinery and plant installed by the old firm. The Patna High Court did not consider the validity of the proceeding contemplated by section 155(5) and had simply confined the question to consider whether the new firm can claim the development rebate in respect of the machinery or plant installed by another firm which also existed in the year when the development rebate was claimed. Both these authorities, therefore, do not benefit the Revenue at all in the instant reference. For the above reasons, we uphold the order of the Tribunal in this regard and answer both the questions in the affirmative, that is, in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. No order as to costs.
-
1992 (10) TMI 52 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Construction Beneficial To Assessee, Depreciation On Motor Vehicles, Law Applicable To Assessment
-
1992 (10) TMI 51 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Assessment, Firm ... ... ... ... ..... going discussion, we are of the clear opinion that in the case of change in the constitution of a firm during an accounting year, the income derived by the original firm shall be assessed in the hands of the reconstituted firm separately from the income derived by it (the reconstituted firm ) during the remaining part of the accounting year. The income of the two firms the firm as it stood before reconstitution and the firm as reconstituted shall not be clubbed together for the purpose of assessment and determination of tax. That, however, as already observed, may not be possible also in very many cases. Needless to say, in view of the provisions of section 187 of the Act, the assessment will have to be made on the firm as constituted on the date of making the assessment. In view of the foregoing discussion, the question of law referred to us is answered in the negative and in favour of the assessee. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, we make no order as to costs.
-
1992 (10) TMI 50 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Assessment Proceedings, Legal Representative ... ... ... ... ..... n of want of notice. It will be a proceeding liable to be challenged and corrected. Similarly, if there is a mistake as to name or there is a misdescription of the name, the proceeding will be liable to be challenged and corrected by giving notice to the assessee subject to such just exceptions as an assessee can take under law. The direction given by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner was to make fresh assessment on Aruna Devi in accordance with the provisions of the Act. A reading of the aforesaid quotation clearly shows that lack of notice to the legal representatives does not amount to the revenue authority having no jurisdiction, but the assessment was defective by reason of want of notice. It was also observed that an assessment proceeding does not cease to be a proceeding under the Act merely by reason of want of notice. Accordingly, we do not find the least ground to interfere in writ jurisdiction and the writ petition is dismissed with costs. Counsel s fee Rs. 500.
-
1992 (10) TMI 49 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Developement Rebate ... ... ... ... ..... y now stand, leave no manner of doubt that the reserve may be created in any previous year in respect of which the development rebate is to be allowed. There is no mandatory requirement to create the requisite reserve in the year of its installation, etc., if the total income is nil or inadequate to create the reserve. The Tribunal, in our opinion, committed no error of law in directing the Income-tax Officer to determine the relevant development rebate reserve admissible to the assessee for the years in question, in which the assessee had suffered losses and had not created the statutory reserve and to carry forward the same and to allow it in the year of profits, subject to the requisite reserve being created in accordance with law within the stipulated period. For what has been stated above, we answer both the questions in the affirmative, in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. The assessee shall be entitled to its costs which we assess at rupees three hundred.
-
1992 (10) TMI 48 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Business Expenditure, Fines And Penalties ... ... ... ... ..... o had suppressed the income and the Settlement Commission has been authorised to give immunity to such assessees, but it cannot be given by the Settlement Commission if the assessee fails to give a full and true account of his income. This decision also supports the view which we have expressed above that section 245C confers on the assessee a concession or option to settle his tax disputes and the availing of that can only be subject to the fulfilment of conditions prescribed under the section. Earlier, it had been pointed out that the application filed by the appellant did not contain the particulars required by section 245C, though the application was filed in Form No. 34B, which would be relevant, after the amendment with effect from October 1, 1984, and the application so filed was an incomplete and defective one, which was rightly not entertained by the first respondent. For the foregoing reasons, we dismiss the writ appeal with costs. Counsel's fee Rs. 1,500 each.
-
1992 (10) TMI 47 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... the above facts are insufficient to come to a conclusion that it is by way of security towards the tax arrears of the father of the petitioner in that case that the title deeds were deposited. It may be noticed that the letter which was filed along with the deposit of title deeds in that case was exactly similar to exhibit P-3 letter produced in this case and the petitioner therein was none other than the son of the petitioner herein. In my view there is substance in the contention raised by learned counsel for petitioner. There is nothing to show that the documents were deposited by the petitioner by way of security for arrears of her husband or any partners of the firms in which her husband and children were partners. There is no contention that there are any arrears due from the petitioner. In the circumstances, there will be a direction to return to the petitioner the documents shown in exhibit P-3 deposited with the Department. Original petition is disposed of as above.
....
|
