|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 181 to 200 of 354 Records
-
1991 (2) TMI 176 - ITAT BOMBAY-C
Assessing Officer, Fees For Technical Services ... ... ... ... ..... ficer is directed to work-out the total income after allowing expenditure. Since on this issue assessee succeeds, the appeal shall be deemed to have been allowed partly in the above terms. 10. As regards ITA No. 2183/BOM/90, the assessment year remains the same, viz., 1984-85. The impugned order is under section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and has been made by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City XII, Bombay. It is dated 23rd March 1988. The assessee relies on the doctrine of merger, which, on the facts of this case, is admittedly applicable, since the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) XIII, Bombay, is dated 27th May 1986 and the jurisdictional High Court decisions in CIT v. P. Muncherji and Co. 1987 167 ITR 671 (Bom.) and Ritz Ltd v. Union of India 1990 184 ITR 599 (Bom.) are on the issue and in favour of the assessee. The impugned order, as such, stands cancelled for obvious reasons. 11. The appeals stand allowed in the above terms
-
1991 (2) TMI 175 - ITAT BANGALORE
... ...
... ... ..... ons of fact, If that is so, the answer to question (1) is self-evident since the facts are clear. 8. Similar questions had been sought in reference in the case of M/s Lakshmamma Shyama Raju Family trust, Trustees of M/s Vinayaka Enterprises and others and the Tribunal had rejected the reference applications holding that no referable question of law arose. The facts in those cases are the same. The Department had moved the High Court of Karnataka under s. 256(2) and the proceedings were civil petition Nos. 501 to 503/1989,51/1990, 174 to 178/90, 241/1990 and 38/1990, (since reported as CIT vs. K. Shyamaraju (Trustee) (1991) 93 CTR (Kar) 76). The High Court rejected those application in its consolidated judgement dt. 15th Oct., 1990 holding that there was no case for calling for a reference of any of the questions. In view of the decision of the Karnataka High Court, where the fact-situation was identical, the reference application is required to be dismissed. It is dismissed.
-
1991 (2) TMI 174 - ITAT BANGALORE
Cinema Business, Cinema Theatre ... ... ... ... ..... CIT v. Murlidhar Jhawar and Purna Ginning and Pressing Factory 1966 60 ITR 95 which has been followed by the same court in the case of State of Uttar Pradesh v. Raza Buland Sugar Co. Ltd. 1979 118 ITR 50. These decisions have been followed by the High Courts of Madras, Bombay and Calcutta to which case law we have already made a reference. The Income-tax Officer having assessed the respective share income of the individual members, it was not open for him to proceed against the association as a whole on the total income. Even from this standpoint of diagnosis the impugned assessment made by the Income-tax Officer is required to be annulled. For the foregoing, the assessment made in the status of AOP by the Income-tax Officer is annulled. We also hold that there cannot be an assessment either in the status of BOI and the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) in this behalf is set aside. 19. The appeal by the assessee is allowed and the cross objection by the revenue is dismissed
-
1991 (2) TMI 173 - ITAT BANGALORE
Accounting Year, Deduction In Respect, Excise Duty, Mercantile System, Supreme Court, Trading Liability
-
1991 (2) TMI 172 - ITAT BANGALORE
... ...
... ... ..... construe the provision differently on the basis of the decisions of the High Courts of Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan. This is one aspect. In the statement of objects and reasons the following is stated in regard to clause 10 of the Taxation Laws (Amendment) Bill, 1984 which proposed to amend the provision to introduce these Explanations The proposed amendments will take effect from 1st April, 1985, and will, accordingly, apply in relation to the assessment year 1985-86 and subsequent years. 149 ITR (Statutes) 44 . The above indicates that the amendment would apply to assessment year 1985-86 and onwards only. In the circumstances, section 40(b), prior to its amendment in 1984, should be construed in the manner the Karnataka High Court has explained. If that be so, section 40(b) hits the payment of interest made to Manilal Mulji in his individual capacity. The view of the authorities below should therefore be upheld. 7. For the foregoing, we dismiss these appeals
-
1991 (2) TMI 171 - ITAT ALLAHABAD-A
... ...
... ... ..... ayable outside India. Therefore, the Revenue succeeds and the disallowance made by the ITO is restored. 6. The last ground relates to the deduction available to the assessee under s. 80L of the IT Act, 1961. The ITO had allowed only Rs. 3,000 whereas the AAC has directed that a sum of Rs. 5,000 should have been allowed under s. 80L. For this year there was a ceiling of Rs. 3,000 with the relaxation that a further sum of Rs. 2,000 can be allowed if it is interest on UTI. Therefore, the AAC was not correct in directing the allowance of any amount in excess of the ceiling put by law. The ceiling for this year was Rs. 3,000 and, therefore, the AAC was not correct in directing the ITO to allow Rs. 5,000 under s. 80L. The Revenue, therefore, succeeds and the claim will be restricted to the sum of Rs. 3,000 only. This point is decided in favour of the Department and against the assessee. 7. Ground No. 5 is general and calls for no adjudication from us. The appeal is allowed partly.
-
1991 (2) TMI 170 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-C
... ...
... ... ..... from inception and the settlors did not derive any benefit by not submitting Form No. 10 within the time prescribed under r. 17. 8. After considering the entire facts and circumstances and after going through the various judgments discussed hereinbefore, we are of the considered opinion that in the absence of any specific time limit prescribed under s. 11(2) for submission of the notice in the prescribed manner to the assessing authority and in the absence of any express or by clear implication any delegation to the rule making authority of any power to impose any time limit, such time limit prescribed in r. 17 for submission of Form No. 10 by the rule making authority is apparently invalid and is clearly contrary to the above referred judgments of various Courts. The appellant trust has duly complied with all the conditions prescribed in s. 11(2) and is clearly entitled to benefits allowable under s. 11(2) of the IT Act, 1961. 9. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed.
-
1991 (2) TMI 169 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-B
Assessing Officer, Investment Allowance ... ... ... ... ..... ase such an order was passed only on 18-12-1985. This would also be our observation insofar as the reference to the words liable to pay used in section 244(1A) are concerned since on 31-8-1984 the assessee was entitled to the refund of Rs. 24,687 and the demand of Rs. 21,603 was created much later viz., 18-12-1985. The position however would have been different in case the ITO, order under section 155(4A) withdrawing investment allowance and creating the demand of Rs. 21,603 would have been passed prior to the order passed by the Assessing Officer on 31-8-1984 giving appeal effects to the order of the Tribunal and resulting in a refund of Rs. 24,687. In the case of such an eventuality the refund would have been a sum of Rs. 3,084 only even on 31-8-1984 and the Assessing Officer under these circumstances would have been justified in allowing interest under section 244(1A) on that amount. In the final analysis we confirm the order of the CIT(Appeals). 8. The appeal is dismissed
-
1991 (2) TMI 168 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-B
Mistake Apparent From Record, Shipping Business ... ... ... ... ..... s. For these reasons and also for the other reasons mentioned above in connection with the cases of M.V. Belstar and M.V. Aegis we find the orders withdrawing DTA reliefs in the cases of all these three ships also as bad in law and on facts. 18. In the final analysis we hold that the orders granting DTA reliefs to the appellants suffered from no mistakes apparent from record, that DTA reliefs granted under those orders created a substantive right in favour of the appellants, that such rights having become vested by lapse of period of limitation could not have been taken away by recourse to action under section 154 and that the orders of withdrawals of such DTA reliefs passed by the ITO in all these cases were bad in law and on facts, arbitrary, without jurisdiction and amounted to abuse of the process of court besides being totally unjust in the facts and circumstances of these cases. Consequently those are not at all sustainable. 19. In the result all the appeals are allowed
-
1991 (2) TMI 167 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-A
... ...
... ... ..... d severally liable for making such payment. The fact that the assessee undertook to make payment of all liabilities of the erstwhile firm at the time of dissolution can only be regarded as capital expenditure, as such amount of income-tax liability paid by the assessee which pertained to earlier years and which represents the income-tax liability of the erstwhile firm, was not an amount expended by the assessee to carry on and earn the profits or gains of the business which it took over, but the said amount was paid to acquire the running business of the erstwhile firm along with its assets and liabilities. Such amount can only be regarded as capital expenditure in the hands of the assessee. 7. In view of the aforesaid discussions, we set aside the order passed by the CIT(A) allowing the aforesaid deduction of Rs. 1,18,920 and direct the ITO to disallow the same while computing the taxable income in the hands of the assessee. 8. In the result the Revenue s appeal is allowed.
-
1991 (2) TMI 166 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-A
Immovable Property, Movable Property ... ... ... ... ..... t sense of the matter the Tribunal has jurisdiction to consider and decide the issue involved in the additional ground. 10. For the reasons mentioned above we find the additional ground raised as relevant and material to the just decision of this case. We accordingly accord permission to the assessee to raise it and we hereby entertain the same. 11. The parties had to agree that neither the A.V.O. in his report nor the IT authorities have considered the effect of the provisions of the U.L.C. Act, 1976 on the valuation of the property in question. It is therefore, necessary to remit the issue in the additional ground to the first appellate authority to be decided according to law after hearing the parties and the AVO. 12. In the result while approving the exercise of his power under section 35 of the Act by the WTO in this case, we remit the issue in the additional ground for the decision of the Dy. CWT(A) as per directions above. The appeal is allowed for statistical purposes
-
1991 (2) TMI 165 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-A
Higher Rate, Rate Of Depreciation ... ... ... ... ..... ges from his customers and on that ground claimed exemption at 40 per cent on his trucks. The High Court held that the main business of the assessee was quarry and selling stones. Charging hire money for delivery of the stones to the customer at their places would not entitle the assessee for depreciation at 40 per cent under item E(1A) but only to 30 per cent under item D(9) of Part III of Appendix I. This view too supports our conclusion. 15. To sum up we hold that the trucks of the assessee were not used in a business of running them on hire during the year under consideration. Depreciation at the rate of 40 per cent as per Entry at Cl. E(1A) of Part III of Appendix I to the Rules was not admissible on them, and depreciation at the rate of 30 per cent as per entry at Cl. D(9) of Part III of the said Appendix had rightly been allowed on them by the ITO. Consequently the orders under appeal are not sustainable. 16. The order under appeals is set aside and the appeals allowed
-
1991 (2) TMI 164 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-A
Settlement Commission, Tax Proceedings, Valuation Date ... ... ... ... ..... Commission in its order has clearly kept this matter open by observing that since they are not dealing with the wealth-tax assessments, they do not consider it necessary to give any finding in relation to the assessee s contention that these items of gold ornaments and silver utensils could not be considered as assessee s wealth. The burden lies upon the Revenue to establish that the assessee in fact owned and possessed all these items of assets on all the relevant valuation dates. No such material exist on the records. The levy of income-tax on the bifurcated amount of income on estimated basis is not at all sufficient to prove the fact that the assessee owned and possessed these items of gold ornaments and silver utensils on the respective valuation dates pertaining to assessment years 1977-78 to 1981-82. We therefore direct the WTO to delete the said items of additions made in the hands of the assessee in all the years under appeal. 6. In the result the appeals are allowed
-
1991 (2) TMI 163 - ITAT AHMEDABAD
Civil Suit,Closing Stock ... ... ... ... ..... ility should be deducted. This submission cannot be accepted. In the year under consideration there was no such legal liability of the assessee to return the amount in question. The liability arose because of the decree passed by the High Court for refund of the price received by the assessee together with interest. If the High Court had not decreed the claim the assessee would not have been under any legal obligation to return the amount. The liability to return the amount arose when the decree was passed by the High Court. As far as the relevant accounting year was concerned, there was no deductible liability. We are not concerned with the position in the accounting year 1980 in which the amount was refunded by the assessee to STC in pursuance of the order of the High Court. As far as assessment year 1964-65 was concerned, the addition in question was justified and no deduction was allowable. The addition made by the ITO is accordingly confirmed. 12. The appeal is dismissed
-
1991 (2) TMI 162 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
Short-landing ... ... ... ... ..... er a long time of landing of goods. He further relied on Calcutta High Court judgment in the case of Everett v. Calcutta Customs and Government of India Order No. 1269/1985 dated 7-6-1985 to that effect that a survey has to be concluded immediately after the goods are discharged from the vessel for the purposes of claiming of refund of duty on the grounds of short-landing by the exporters, clearing agents. 3. Government have gone through the revision application and arguments advanced during personal hearing and observe that even though the packages landed with remarks as per BPT tally report, survey was conducted much later. The remarks in no way tell the condition of the contents inside the packages. It therefore cannot be stated categorically as to whether the shortage had taken place subsequent to landing or prior to landing. The applicants are, accordingly granted the benefit of doubt. 4. In the result, the revision application succeeds and impugned orders are set aside.
-
1991 (2) TMI 161 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
... ...
... ... ..... rticle of polyethylene. To draw an analogy, say of a bag made from cotton textile can it be said that it is an article of cotton? Apparently no. Similarly, here it is the immediately preceding raw-material which should be taken into account for determining the material from which an article is made i.e. HDPE fabrics. Government is aware of the fact that there was no entry at the relevant time for fabrics made of polyethylene in the Drawback Schedule. In that case it was open to them to apply for drawback rate, under Rule 6 of the Drawback Rules because it appears from the Schedule that the amount of rate of drawback has not been notified in respect of fabrics made up of polyethylene and articles of such fabrics. Party having not applied for brand rule cannot now plead that the bags be treated as articles of polyethylene, the original raw-material from which fabrics are made. 5. In the result, the revision application having no merit is rejected and is disposed of accordingly.
-
1991 (2) TMI 160 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
Short-landed goods ... ... ... ... ..... n good condition, the Asstt. Collector had imposed the impugned penalty. Even the Collector (Appeals) had endorsed this stand of the Asstt. Collr. 4. Government observe that there is nothing on record to show that the short-landing was recorded or noticed at the time of unloading. There is also considerable force in the arguments of the party that the excess quantity received should have been adjusted against the alleged short-landing particularly as both relate to same ship voyage. The fact whether the consignee was not offered goods in good condition and, therefore, were not accepted by him is not a valid argument against the carriers. As there is un manifested excess there is a case for considering this excess on merits against the short-landing. In the circumstances, the Government set asides the order of the Collector (Appeals) holding that the party has satisfactorily explained the shortage and finally under Section 116, Customs Act, 1962 is not warranted and set aside.
-
1991 (2) TMI 159 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
Short-landing ... ... ... ... ..... stment of excess landed cargo against short-landed quantity. 5. Since as per the survey report which is not contrary to quantity excess landed, 51 gunny bags of LDPE containing original burst and torn plastic bags were found and 204 gunny bags were found in loose conditions (in all 255 bags) can be taken as relevant to satisfactorily explanation by the shipping agent on short-landing. As the other goods (60 bags) found in excess could be of other item (polystyrene) against Line No. 298 where also shortages of 60 bags shown on the OTR its benefit cannot be given to the applicants in respect of the impugned Line No. 274. Hence adopting a pro rata formula and permitting adjustment of the aforesaid 255 bags excess landed the penalty under Section 116 of the Customs Act, 1962 is reduced from Rs. 1,07,000/- to Rs. 31,000/- holding that shortage of bags to the extent of 255 are satisfactorily explained. 6. The revision application is allowed in above terms with consequential relief.
-
1991 (2) TMI 158 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
Appeal - Adjudication ... ... ... ... ..... uent order-in-original dated 22-6-1989 and order-in-appeal dated 8-8-1990 is wholly unwarranted. If one may say so, legal position is that by earlier proceedings culminating in the order dated 25-3-1986 of the Collector (Appeals) these authorities had become functus officio except on the limited point of redetermination of the penalty. 3. It is a matter of record that the penalty of Rs. 1,09,870/- is relatable only to 80 small drums and one big drum which is the stand of the party. Therefore, the Government feels that there is no scope of interference with this finding which a natural corollary to the decision of the then Collector (Appeals) in his order dated 25-3-1986. 4. Other matters now forming subject of order-in-appeal dated 8-8-1990 flowing from an order of the Collector who is functus officio don t need any observation or finding by the Government. The imposition of penalty of Rs. 1,09,870/- (Rupees One lakh nine thousand eight hundred and seventy only) is confirmed.
-
1991 (2) TMI 157 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
Short-landing ... ... ... ... ..... limbs i.e. (a) tampering of seals (or qualified receipts by Port Trust) and (b) discovery of shortages in examination (including survey and destuffing etc.) done within a short period. The first limb is established here. 3. As regards second it is observed that surveys in this case were held within 15 days (Item No. 3) which is a reasonable period and the LRC also showed that the goods had landed in damaged conditions. In respect of Line No. 90 the destuffing was also done within a week of the unloading. The same is the position in regard to Line Nos. 118 and 119. Hence shortage is found within a reasonable period. 4. Thus, in short the seals in respect of impugned containers were not intact at the time of landing and shortages having been discovered within a short period there is no doubt that the goods had in fact short-landed. In view of these discussions there is no merit in the revision application. The order-in-appeal is upheld and the revision application is rejected.
............
|
