|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 181 to 200 of 304 Records
-
1993 (3) TMI 134 - ITAT BOMBAY-B
Fixed Deposit, Interest Income, Long-term Capital Gains, Previous Year ... ... ... ... ..... income to include income which accrues or is received. Obviously, it has to be taxed at the earliest point of time, namely, accrual, unless the assessee chooses to offer it on receipt basis by maintaining the cash system of accounting. In the present case, the assessee had, no doubt, offered the entire receipt originally but on the footing that it was a capital receipt. Once it is held that it is a revenue receipt, the assessee has to be given the option as indicated in the Circulars of the CBDT and consequently the assessee is entitled to succeed in the claim that only the interest which accrued in the previous year should be assessed to tax in this previous year. We, therefore, deem it fit to set aside the orders of the authorities below and remit the matter to the ITO to recompute the total income by confining the interest income to that which accrued in the previous year relevant to the present assessment year. 5. The appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purposes
-
1993 (3) TMI 133 - ITAT BOMBAY-A
Revision, Of Orders Prejudicial To Interests Of Revenue ... ... ... ... ..... enue and in favour of the assessee. Thus, both the decisions of the Bombay High Court lead to the same conclusion that the power of the CIT to revise orders under section 263 in respect of orders of partial merger is available only with effect from 1-6-1988 and not earlier. It is, therefore. incorrect, in my opinion, on the part of the learned Judicial Member to say that the Bombay High Court in International Computers Indian Manufacture Ltd. s case had decided the case against the assessee. 7. For the above reasons, I agree with the view expressed by the teamed Accountant Member and hold that the CIT had jurisdiction and validly initiated action and passed his order under section 263 on 13-3-1989 and the passing of the order by the CIT (Appeals) on 31-7-1987 did not vitiate or oust the jurisdiction of the CIT to pass his order under section 263. 8. The matter will now go before the regular Bench for disposal of the appeal on merits in accordance with opinion of the majority.
-
1993 (3) TMI 132 - ITAT BOMBAY-A
Capital Gains, Capital Loss, Carry Forward, Debatable Issue, Mistake Apparent From Record ... ... ... ... ..... s not filed an appeal against the order sought to be rectified. 8. In the light of the above, I am of the opinion that the order of the ITO refusing to rectify the mistake committed by him in making the adjustment on a debatable issue in the Intimation under section 143(1)(a) of the Act, is not justified. I, therefore, set aside the orders of the departmental authorities and direct the ITO to rectify the Intimation as prayed for by the assessee, as, in my opinion, he has no power to make the imugned adjustment, the adjustment of a debatable nature, not being within the purview of the proviso to section 143(1)(a), of the Act. 9. In these circumstances, the alternate claim of the assessee that the provisions of section 48(3) of the Act, cannot be invoked to scale down the initial deduction under section 48(2) of the Act, if there is an overall long-term capital gain under the head capital gains need not be discussed and adjudicated upon. 10. In the result, the appeal is allowed
-
1993 (3) TMI 131 - ITAT BOMBAY-A
A Partner, Application For Registration, Partnership Deed ... ... ... ... ..... the company to accept and ratify all his actions. When such ratification is made, it dates back so as to accept even transactions entered into prior to the incorporation as that of the company (See the Karnataka High Court decision in Chief CIT v. Senapathy Whitely Ltd. 1992 198 ITR 753. Moreover, it is of no consequence to the other partners or to the validity of a deed of partnership that one of the partners represents some other person, as held by the Supreme Court in the case of Bagyalakshmi and Co. It has also been held by the Bombay High Court in CIT v. Raghavji Anandji and Co. 1975 100 ITR 246 that the same person can act in two different capacities in forming a partnership with others. It is also established by the assessee that after incorporation the company has ratified the acts of Kuldeep Singh Nanda. Taking all these facts into consideration, we are convinced that the firm is genuine and is entitled to registration. We direct accordingly. 5. The appeal is allowed
-
1993 (3) TMI 130 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-C
... ...
... ... ..... s about which the CIT(A) has made confirmation, is Rs. 47,111 and his confirmation should be deleted. 16. We have perused the entire evidence. We have also examined the documents to which our attention was drawn in the course of arguments. We find that appreciation of material on record made by the CIT(A) was wholly acceptable and there was no justification for interference therein. It is not necessary for us to examine each and every item again. We agree with the reasons given by the CIT(A) and confirm his order. We reject the submissions made by the Department and by the assessee. 17. Before parting, we may mention that the assessee had stated before us that although in the wealth-tax proceedings in the case of Smt. Manjulaben assessments were made on protective basis but no substantive assessment in the wealth-tax proceedings of the assessee for asst. yr. 1983-84 had been made in respect of the value of the ornaments. 18. The appeal and the cross-objections are dismissed.
-
1993 (3) TMI 129 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-B
... ...
... ... ..... ting of know-how was really in the nature of services rendered without anything more, the receipt would be treated as revenue receipt but when the consideration was received for imparting know-how in association with the disposal of a capital asset, then the receipt would be treated as a capital receipt. 8. In the present case the technical know-how has been transferred alongwith all capital assets of the scooter manufacturing division. The amount has not been received for rendering any services to the transferee. The amount has been received for unconditional transfer of the technical know-how. In fact, under the agreement the assessee was debarred from pursuing similar activity. In the circumstances there could be no doubt on the point that the amount received by the assessee for transfer of technical know-how did not represent revenue receipt and the CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition. The ground raised by the Department is rejected. 9. The appeal is dismissed.
-
1993 (3) TMI 128 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-A
... ...
... ... ..... icularly so where the provision relates to the imposition of penalty. 15. We respectfully follow those decisions which have taken the view in favour of the assessee on this point and hold that no penalty under s. 271(1)(c) was leviable if the finally assessed amount is a loss and not a positive income. Consequently in the present case no penalty could have been levied. We accordingly cancel the penalty for both the years. 16. Before parting we may mention that the words of Expln. 4 to s. 271(1)(c) were similar to words in the provision relating to additional income-tax in s. 143(1A). As observed by the Allahabad High Court in one of the decisions and in several decisions under said provision, additional income-tax could not be levied in those cases where finally assessed amount was a loss. This provision is sought to be amended by recent legislation but no similar amendment appears to have been contemplated in Expln. 4 to s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. 17. The appeals are allowed.
-
1993 (3) TMI 127 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Warehousing - Interest ... ... ... ... ..... in a warehouse for more than a year are liable to be charged with interest. Apart from that when the intention of the legislature is clear by the language used by it in different sections of the Act, there was no question of applying deeming provision which would have the effect of extending the meaning of a definition. 12.That being the position, I am of the view that the writ petitioner is not liable to pay any interest in terms of Section 61(2) of the Customs Act. Therefore, the amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- which had been directed to be deposited by the writ petitioners with the customs authority should be refunded, if it has been deposited in terms of my earlier order. 13.Accordingly, I direct the concerned respondent to refund the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- deposited by the writ petitioner in terms of my order, dated 18th of Dec., 1991 within two months from the date of communication of this order. 14.The writ petition is thus disposed of. 15.There will be no order as to costs.
-
1993 (3) TMI 126 - HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Stay - Appeal - CEGAT ... ... ... ... ..... in the extended period granted in another M.C.C., the matter has not been disposed of. We fail to understand how the petitioner is prejudice if the stay order is continued till the disposal of the petition. The time stipulated in M.P. No. 1371/89 and extended in another M.C.C. was only an expectation of this Court that the matter will be disposed of during this period. But if it is not disposed of within that period it does not mean that the stay shall come to an end or that the matter cannot now be decided beyond the period stipulated. No further orders are really necessary in this case. The case is disposed of. 3. We hope and trust that at least now the case shall be expeditiously dealt with and disposed of.
-
1993 (3) TMI 125 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
Adjudication - Evidence ... ... ... ... ..... register is not traceable. The respondents have not believed the register maintained by the petitioner on flimsy grounds and have not produced the register for the perusal of the Court and, therefore, an adverse inference deserves to be drawn against them as the entries do find place in the register maintained by the petitioner and no provision of the Act has been contravened and, therefore, the penalty imposed by the respondents under Section 74 of the Act against the petitioner for the contravention of the provisions of Section 55 of the Act, which requires the petitioner to make the entries in the register, also, deserves to be quashed and set aside. 6.In the result, the writ petition, filed by the petitioner, is allowed. The orders Annexure 3, Annexure 4 and Annexure 5, passed by the respondents, are set aside and the confiscation of the gold ornaments made by the respondents is declared wholly illegal and the petitioner is entitled for the return of these gold ornaments.
-
1993 (3) TMI 124 - SUPREME COURT
Demand on the basis of normal production - Assessment - Normal production - Fixation of - Appeal - Evidence - Appreciation of
-
1993 (3) TMI 123 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
'Components for Cable Jointing Kits' ... ... ... ... ..... Petitions on the ground of the existence of alternate remedy under the CTA. Such exercise, at this stage, would be unnecessary and unjust. There is no factual controversy. The goods have already been released by interim order passed by this Court three years before. The point involved is of law and appears to be obvious. 10. In the circumstances, we declare that the subject goods merit classification under Heading 85.47 of the CTA and we quash the impugned decision of classifying them under Heading 39.26. 11. As a necessary consequence of the above order, the bonds given for the differential amounts in pursuance of the interim orders passed by this Court will have to be discharged but at the request of Mr. Rege, learned Counsel for the Respondents, we direct that they be discharged only after a period of 12 weeks from today. 12. All these petitions are thus allowed and the rule in each of these petitions is made absolute in the above terms. There will be no order as to costs.
-
1993 (3) TMI 122 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Estoppel - Import - Bill of entry - Presentation of - Effect ... ... ... ... ..... Classification made on that basis has no nexus with the purpose of the public notices and hence also it is discriminatory and hence violative of Article 14. 12. Under the circumstances, these petitions are allowed and the impugned administrative decision dated 1-4-1991 is quashed and set aside. 13. By different ad-interim orders passed by this Court, the goods have been ordered to be cleared in some cases on the basis of the Bonds in some cases on the basis of Bank Guarantees and in some cases on the basis of actual payment of differential duty. We direct that the Bonds as well as Bank Guarantees shall stand cancelled. We further direct that the amount of differential duty paid, shall be refunded to be concerned Petitioners with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of payment till refund, within a period of eight weeks from today. 14. Rule made absolute in the above terms in each of the petitions. 15. No order as to Costs. 16. Certified copy expedited.
-
1993 (3) TMI 121 - HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Penalty and Fine (Customs) ... ... ... ... ..... plicant. 40. It is clear from the correspondence between the foreign exporter and the applicant that the applicant was not aware that the exporter replaced the earlier machines damaged by new machine with screw of 150 mm diameter. The deviation again appears to have crept in because of the long period during which litigation was going on and the foreign manufacturer changed over to metric system and 150 mm diameter was adopted as the usual size. It was principally on account of the obstructions in the import that this mistake could creep in. The correspondence also shows that the applicant was totally unaware of these eventualities until the imports arrived. Thus, the Tribunal failed to appreciate the facts and circumstances of the case and arrived at an important conclusion which is not sustainable. 41. For the reasons aforesaid, the question in this reference must be answered in the affirmative. 42. There will be no order as to costs. 43. Shyamal Kumar Sen, J . . - I agree.
-
1993 (3) TMI 120 - HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CEGAT vis-a-vis ITAT - Appellate powers - Scope of - Stay - Writ jurisdiction ... ... ... ... ..... ved, is relating to absence of any order about refund of fine. According to us, it would have been within the competence of the Central Government and subsequently of the Tribunal only to order for refund of fine by slightly altering the impugned judgment inasmuch as the power of these two bodies was and is confined to modification or annulment, and nothing more. In view of the meaning of the word modify as noted above, a slight alteration would have been permissible, but to award market price was not permissible, according to us, as that is not a modification of the order, and definitely not annulment. 22. We would, therefore, modify the impugned orders by stating that the Central Government shall pay to the charterer the aforesaid sum of rupees two lakhs alongwith interest at the rates allowed by the Reserve Bank during the intervening periods. This amount shall be refunded to the Charterer within a period of three months from today. 23. The petition is allowed accordingly.
-
1993 (3) TMI 119 - HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Import policy - Raw silk ... ... ... ... ..... he general public to be aware of any internal Circular which might have been issued by the Department. 14. For the reasons aforesaid, I direct that the respondents will release 80 per cent of the goods covered by REP Licences/Exim Scrips of the petitioners upon payment of duty on the entire consignment and upon furnishing of I.T.C. Bond for the entire consignment after provisional assessment of duty. Such release shall be made at the latest by 12th March 1993. 20 per cent of the raw silk shall be retained by the respondents in a bonded warehouse until this matter is finally heard and disposed of. Liberty is also given to the respondents to adjudicate whether the goods are covered by the licences or not. 15. The matter is adjourned till 15th March 1993. Affidavit in reply if any, is to be filed by 12th March 1993. 16. Let it be made clear that this order is limited to the writ petitioners. 17. All parties to act on a signed copy of this dictated order on the usual undertaking.
-
1993 (3) TMI 118 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Valuation - Exemption on the basis of value of the goods ... ... ... ... ..... a amount from the consumer that cannot necessarily be called as excise duty to be payable by the dealer. It may go towards the earning (income). The petitioner submitted the statement concerning the following columns on the basis of which the notice appears to have been issued - Article No. Code No. Name Max. Retail Price per Pair Max. Wholesale price per Pair Abatement Dis. 13-2-91 Value incl. Duty Assessable Value 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. On the data against such columns the value under Section 4(4)(d)(ii) of the Act is not to be fixed as such. It is the notional value to be fixed and the element of excise duty and trading discount is to be deducted therefrom to determine as to whether articles would be exempt from the payment of excise duty as has been held by the Supreme Court in the two judgments referred to above. 11. For the reasons recorded above, this writ petition is allowed and the impugned order Annexure P. 7 is quashed and the notice Annexure P. 8 is also quashed.
-
1993 (3) TMI 117 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Valuation - Cost of transportation ... ... ... ... ..... he value of the goods for the purposes of payment of excise duty (c) for the purposes of determining the amount of trade discount granted by the petitioners to their credit customers which is re- quired to be deducted from the value of the goods. 22. For the purposes of so determining the deductions in the light of our judgment, the Assistant Collector may permit the petitioners to produce any additional material that the Assistant Collector may require or which the petitioners may produce before the Assistant Collector. Such additional material to be furnished within 6 weeks and the final adjudication to be made by the Assistant Collector within 12 weeks. 23. As far as refunds are concerned, it will be open to the Assistant Collector to pass such order as he may consider appropriate, in accordance with law in the light of the provisions of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. 24. Rule is made absolute accordingly. In the circumstances, there will be no orders as to costs.
-
1993 (3) TMI 116 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Valuation - Cash discount ... ... ... ... ..... e Order No. V(68)18-154/80/1933 dated 19th March, 1984, is set aside and the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Division Thane, is directed to dispose of the eight refund applications for the period 1st July, 1977 to 10th February, 1981, in accordance with law within a period of 12 weeks as indicated hereinabove. The Assistant Collector would be entitled to call upon the petitioners for further particulars or documents in addition to documents already furnished. (ii) As regards the Order of the Assistant Collector bearing No. C. EX. 6/WP/59/91/PL/1941 dated 19th March, 1984, the only relief which the Petitioners are entitled to is the deduction at the rate of 5 in respect of Cash discount. Consequently, to that extent only, the Petitioners would be entitled to refund to be decided by the Assistant Collector within a period of 12 weeks from today and in accordance with law. 7. In the light of the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of with no order as to costs.
-
1993 (3) TMI 115 - HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Interest on delayed payment of refund payable thereon ... ... ... ... ..... deposit was made by the respondent. The interest was directed to run from 1st November, 1990. Presumably by that time the period of limitation for a reference to the High Court had expired. We cannot accept the contention of Mr. Roychowdhury that interest should be calculated only from the date when the application for refund was made on 22nd February, 1991. In our view, application for refund is not a condition precedent for obtaining the refund of cash security. It is not a refund of provisional duty, it was the obligation of the Revenue Authority to refund such deposit whether or not application in that behalf was made. 12. For the reasons aforesaid it must be held that the appeal is misconceived. The appeal, therefore, fails and is dismissed. There will be no order as to costs. Let the interest be paid as directed by the court of the first instance by 30th April, 1993. 13. Let the parties act on a signed copy of the minutes of the operative part of the judgment and order.
............
|
