|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 181 to 200 of 217 Records
-
1993 (11) TMI 37 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Bad Debt, Market Value, Share In Firm, Wealth Tax ... ... ... ... ..... refore, was not entitled for the depreciation. Accordingly, it is held that the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee was not the owner of Maratha Mandir, Bombay, and was not entitled for depreciation. So far as question No. 5 is concerned, the facts are that the assessee made a claim while computing its income in respect of interest charged by the Department under section 139(8) of the Income-tax Act for late filing of the return of the total income and also interest charged by the Department under section 220 of the Act for not paying the tax demanded by the Department. It was held that the said amount cannot be said to have been paid for the purpose of carrying out the business of the assessee. This point is also covered by the decision given by this court in the case of the assessee in Golecha Properties (P) Ltd. v. CIT 1988 171 ITR 47. Consequently, questions Nos. 1, 2, 4 and 5 are answered in favour of the Revenue and question No. 3 is returned unanswered.
-
1993 (11) TMI 36 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Assessment Year, Bank Deposits, Wealth Tax ... ... ... ... ..... that any prejudice was caused. The finding which has been recorded by the Tribunal is one of fact that it is not disputed that opportunity of being heard was given before altering the status of the assessee from that of a Hindu undivided family to that of an individual. In the two cases of CWT v. Ridhkaran 1972 84 ITR 705 (Raj) and CIT v. Suresh Chandra Gupta 1988 173 ITR 407 (Raj), no opportunity appears to have been given and, therefore, we are of the view that the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was not justified in holding that the assessments made in the status of individual on the returns having been filed in the status of Hindu undivided family are vitiated. We are of the opinion that it has wrongly been mentioned that no notice was given under section 139(2), because we are of the opinion that the opportunity which was given to the assessee for change of status amounts to a notice. Accordingly, the reference is answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee.
-
1993 (11) TMI 35 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Actual Cost, Development Allowance, Export Business, Income Tax Act, Initial Depreciation, Weighted Deduction
-
1993 (11) TMI 34 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Net Wealth, Wealth Tax Act ... ... ... ... ..... would apply to assessments pending as on the date of the coming into force of the Rules. The object of the provision is to bring simplicity besides giving a benefit to the assessee in respect of valuation of property. In these circumstances, when neither the right of any person is affected nor the provisions of section 7(4) come in the way of the charging section and are only machinery provisions to make the charging section effective, the provisions of section 7(4) have to be considered as procedural and, therefore, applicable to all cases pending on the date of coming into force of the Act. In these circumstances, it is held that the Income tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in coming to the conclusion that the provisions of section 7(4) of the Wealth-tax Act are procedural in nature and are applicable to all cases which were pending on the date of coming into force of the said Act. Accordingly, the reference is answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.
-
1993 (11) TMI 33 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Accrual Of Income ... ... ... ... ..... rued unless it is made a rule of the court. A different position may arise in a case where the interest was payable otherwise and in that case if the accounts are maintained on mercantile basis, then the interest could be deemed to accrue but if the interest is under an award, then the income would be considered to have accrued or arisen only when it is made a rule of the court. This matter pertains to the assessment year 1975-76 and by this time it must have become a rule of the court and a final decree must have been passed. It will be for the Income-tax Officer to get the information from the assessee and assess in the year in which it has been made a rule of the court. Under these circumstances, we are of the view that the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified that unless the award is made a rule of the court, the interest amount of Rs. 29,312 cannot be said to have accrued to the assessee and could not be brought to tax in its hands in the relevant assessment year.
-
1993 (11) TMI 32 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Search And Seizure ... ... ... ... ..... been considered. In these circumstances, we are of the view that the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was not justified in cancelling the penalty of Rs. 33,000 levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Act of 1961. The reference is returned unanswered and the Tribunal is directed first to take into consideration the explanation of the assessee and if the Tribunal is satisfied with the explanation then record a finding thereon and thereafter will consider as to whether the Department has been able to discharge its burden which has been shifted to it because of discharge of the initial burden of the assessee. At that stage, the question of application of the decision of Anwar Ali s case 1970 76 ITR 696 (SC) would not arise. This is all that has to be done considering that the Explanation to section 271(1)(c) was applicable and for which notice was also issued. Proper opportunity will be given to both the parties. The reference is accordingly returned unanswered. No order as to costs.
-
1993 (11) TMI 31 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Business Connection, Foreign Company, In The Nature, Income Deemed To Accrue Or Arise In India, Income Tax Act, Indian Company, Revenue Receipt, Setting Up
-
1993 (11) TMI 30 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Income Tax Act ... ... ... ... ..... tion could not be said to be to the detriment of the minors inasmuch as they were given Rs. 1 lakh each and the karta who has exercised the power has received Rs. 5,000 alone. If a person has power to make a total partition he has the power to make a partial partition. In the present case, the intention of the co-partitioners has also been taken into consideration when their affidavits were filed and it was found as a fact that there was unequivocal intention on the part of the members of the family to effect the partial partition. In view of the judgment in Apoorva Shantilal Shah s case 1983 141 ITR 558 (SC) referred to above and the finding which has been recorded by the Tribunal, it is held that it was not necessary to have the consent of the other minor sons before effecting the partial partition. The Tribunal was, therefore, justified in holding that the partial partition was valid. The reference is accordingly answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.
-
1993 (11) TMI 29 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Bad Debt, Market Value, Share In Firm, Wealth Tax ... ... ... ... ..... alth-tax Officer has made necessary adjustments in respect of outstanding dues of Rs. 59,000 and Rs. 1,11,048 which could not be realised by the firm, Messrs. Thakurdas Khinvraj Rathi, Beawar, from the parties, Messrs. Radha Krishna Trading Co. (P.) Ltd., and Messrs. S. Vappa, Raichur, while working out the value of the assessee s share in the said firm and accordingly allowing relief of Rs. 85,024, i.e., equivalent to the 50 per cent. share of the assessee in the firm. So far as the second question is concerned, the said question is covered by the decision of this court in Seth Mukund Dos Rathi v. CWT 1991 188 ITR 518 and on the basis of the said judgment, it is held that the gratuity liability is an unascertained liability and, therefore, the same should not be deducted while determining the market value of the shares of Krishna Mills, Beawar. Accordingly, the first question is answered in favour of the assessee and the second in favour of the Revenue. No order as to costs.
-
1993 (11) TMI 28 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Income Tax Act, Question Of Law, Rectification Of Mistakes ... ... ... ... ..... the first appellate authority for decision on the merits. The first appellate authority thereafter dismissed the appeals as barred by time. The assessee appealed to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal where the appeals were initially dismissed ex parte. On an application, the Tribunal recalled its order and restored the appeals for fresh decision. Ultimately, the Tribunal allowed the appeals filed by the assessee by a composite order which is the subject-matter of these applications. We have heard learned standing counsel. No one has put in appearance on behalf of the assessee despite notice. Having considered the matter carefully, in our opinion, the orders of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal do give rise to the questions set out earlier. We, accordingly, direct the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to draw up a statement of the case and refer the aforesaid questions for the opinion of this court. In the result, the applications are allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
-
1993 (11) TMI 27 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Assessment Proceedings, Income Tax Act, Information That Income Has Escaped Assessment, Original Assessment, Retrospective Effect
-
1993 (11) TMI 26 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Cash Credits, Income Tax Act, Question Of Law ... ... ... ... ..... in contravention of rule 46A, the order of the Tribunal will give rise to a question of law. This has been so held by a Division Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in CIT v. Elekchand Jain 1988 171 ITR 308. In CIT v. Raza Textiles Ltd. 1988 169 ITR 258, a Division Bench of this court has held that an order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal would give rise to a question of law where the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal reverses the decision of the Revenue authorities in appeal without meeting the reasons recorded therein and the material referred to in support thereof by the authorities below. In view of the aforesaid discussion, in our opinion, the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal does give rise to a question of law. Accordingly, we direct the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to draw up a statement of case and to refer the aforesaid question for the opinion of this court. In the result, the application succeeds and is allowed with costs which we assess at Rs. 150.
-
1993 (11) TMI 25 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Search And Seizure ... ... ... ... ..... ilar facts, an application under section 256(2) of the Act was rejected by a Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in CIT v. K. Venkateswara Rao 1982 134 ITR 328, where it was held that no question of law was involved. In our opinion, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, in the instant case, was justified in holding that the mistake committed by the assessee in the distribution of profits initially otherwise than in accordance with the provisions of the partnership deed was an honest mistake. Even the question proposed in the applications does not challenge the finding of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in this respect. The mistake being a bona fide one, the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct and the firm was entitled to registration. For what has been stated above, these applications are rejected by saying that the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal does not give rise to any statable question of law. There shall be no order as to costs.
-
1993 (11) TMI 24 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Income Tax Act, Offences And Prosecution, Tax At Source, Tax Deducted At Source ... ... ... ... ..... ated above, I am not inclined to interfere with the impugned order dated September 18, 1990, nor is there any justification to quash the proceedings on the facts given above. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that in the case of some sleeping partners, there was no justification for framing charges. Therefore, at least the proceedings be quashed qua the sleeping partners. This issue has not been considered by the trial court and when two prosecution witnesses have also been examined, I do not find any justification to make an investigation in a petition under section 482, Criminal Procedure Code, and give a finding who is the sleeping partner. Therefore, on that account also, I do not find any justification to interfere with the impugned order as well as no justification to quash the proceedings. However, this objection can be raised and argued at the time of final decision on the complaint filed by the Department. In the result, the petition is dismissed.
-
1993 (11) TMI 23 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Flat Rate, Question Of Law ... ... ... ... ..... oceeds on a misunderstanding of the assessment order when it is said that the Income-tax Officer had given a finding that the flat rate was being applied taking into consideration the admissible depreciation. We may also observe that the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in determining the question about the rate to be applied had judged the same with reference to the past history of the assessee s case and found that nine per cent. flat rate should be the reasonable rate. Admittedly, in the past, nine per cent. was being applied without taking into account the claim for depreciation. Learned counsel for the Revenue relied upon a decision of this court in Saraya Engineering Works v. CIT 1987 168 ITR 455. That case, in our opinion, is clearly distinguishable and has no application to the facts of the instant case. For what has been stated above, both the applications are devoid of merit and are, accordingly, rejected with costs which we assess at a consolidated figure of Rs. 300.
-
1993 (11) TMI 22 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Best Judgment Assessment, Flat Rate, Question Of Law ... ... ... ... ..... ceptional circumstances. In every case of best judgment, the element of guess work cannot be eliminated. So long as the best judgment has nexus with the material on record and the discretion in that behalf has not been exercised arbitrarily or capriciously, it is not open to scrutiny in these proceedings to give rise to a question of law or to a mixed question of law and fact. In the present case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal while arriving at its conclusion has taken into account the past and subsequent events in the assessee s own case as well as the prevailing trading conditions at the relevant time and the average rate of profit disclosed by similar traders in the area about which no fault was pointed out to us. For what has been stated above, the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is concluded by findings of fact and does not give rise to any question of law. The application is without merit and is accordingly rejected with costs which we assess at Rs. 200.
-
1993 (11) TMI 21 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Bona Fide, Waiver Of Penalty And Interest ... ... ... ... ..... n my view, suffer from this error of law, which is apparent on the face of the record. The Commissioner of Income-tax had not recorded that the assessee had not satisfied the conditions mentioned under section 273A of the Act nor has he recorded the reasons for not allowing full waiver of the penalty or with regard to the reduction of the amount of penalty and interest to the extent indicated in the orders. In the result, both these writ petitions are allowed and the impugned orders passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax on January 14, 1981, for the assessment years 1975-76 and 1976-77 with regard to the petitioner-assessee are quashed and set aside and the matter is remanded to the Commissioner of Income-tax for passing reasoned orders for both the years, i.e., 1975-76 and 1976-77, with regard to the waiver/reduction of the amount of penalty and interest under section 273A of the Act. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the parties are left to bear their own costs.
-
1993 (11) TMI 20 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Deposit In Bank, Expenditure Incurred, Fixed Deposit, Income Tax Act, Mutual Concern, Other Sources
-
1993 (11) TMI 19 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Income Tax Act, Revised Return ... ... ... ... ..... g of the last of such of the returns (provided the same had been filed within the period of limitation). We prima facie agree with the aforesaid view expressed by the Madhya Pradesh High Court, but, at the same time, in this case, in our view, it would not be necessary to decide the aforesaid question because of the instruction issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes upon which learned counsel for the assessee places reliance. Since the effect of the aforesaid instruction has not been considered by the Tribunal, because it was not cited before the Tribunal or the authorities below, it would be just and proper not to express any final opinion on the question referred to us by the Tribunal. It would be for the Tribunal to decide the matter afresh in the light of the Instruction No. 888 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes and in accordance with law. In the result, the question is left unanswered. The reference stands disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs.
-
1993 (11) TMI 18 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Business Expenditure, Collaboration Agreement, Foreign Company, Such Employee ... ... ... ... ..... paying monthly remuneration. It provides that the assessee was required to pay 800 Francs as monthly remuneration from the day he leaves and reaches Switzerland. Other conditions provide that air passage, boarding, lodging and travelling expenses were to be borne by the assessee. The assessee was also required to pay Rs. 150 as pocket expenses of Mr. Guzek. Considering the aforesaid facts, in our view, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that Mr. Guzek was an employee of the assessee-company and that the provisions of section 40(c)(iii) were attracted. We may note at this stage that no dispute is raised by learned counsel for the assessee that once it is held that Mr. Guzek was an employee of the assessee-company, the provisions of section 40(c)(iii) would be attracted. In the result, questions Nos. 1 and 2 are answered in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. The reference stands disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs.
....
|
