|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 221 to 240 of 271 Records
-
1994 (4) TMI 51 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Assessment Order, Being Heard, Income Tax Act, Reference To IAC ... ... ... ... ..... d to proceed from that stage. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner, that the directions given by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) have not been followed, may give him the right to challenge the order which has been passed in pursuance of the directions given by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) in the present case and it cannot be examined in the present proceedings as that would be a separate cause of action for the assessee to challenge the order, if it is not in accordance with law or the directions given by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). The prayer for cancellation of the assessment order cannot be accepted looking to the facts and circumstances of the present case. The Income-tax Tribunal, therefore, was right in law in upholding the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and in not cancelling the assessment. The reference is, therefore, answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. No order as to costs.
-
1994 (4) TMI 50 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Burden Of Proof, Capital Gains, Wealth Tax Act ... ... ... ... ..... ally admissible material and cannot be just a subjective inferential fact. In the absence of any material to indicate the percentage of fluctuation in the prices of the immovable properties, it will be an entirely guess work to deduct a few percentage from the subsequent year s valuation to arrive at the valuation for the previous years. The ideas in the above passage are quite clear, and, in my respectful opinion, quite correct. For the above reason, I am of the opinion that the reopening of wealth-tax assessments for the years in question has been vitiated by a mechanical and irrational application in the reverse manner of the factor of Cost Inflation Index in the instant case. The writ application, accordingly, succeeds. There shall be rules absolute in terms of prayers (a), (b) and (c) and also a permanent injunction in terms of prayer (e) of the petition. All parties and others concerned shall act on a xerox signed copy of this dictated order upon the usual undertakings.
-
1994 (4) TMI 49 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Capital Gains, Computation Of Capital, Cost Of Acquisition, Fair Market Value, Taxing Statutes, The High Court
-
1994 (4) TMI 48 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Jurisdiction To Levy Penalty, Law Applicable To Assessment, Taxing Statutes ... ... ... ... ..... afraid the order passed by the Tribunal cannot be said to be the judgment by the Tribunal in accordance with the provisions of section 254/255 of the Income-tax Act. The judgment has to be given by both the members and if one of the members has not given the judgment, it cannot be considered to be an order passed in accordance with the provisions of section 254/255. In these circumstances, the matter is sent back to the Tribunal to take into consideration the date on which the matter was referred by the Income-tax Officer to the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner and if the said date is prior to April 1, 1976, then the order of the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner will not be considered to be without jurisdiction. In case the reference has not been made prior to April 1, 1976, the Tribunal will hear the appeal afresh ignoring the view which the judicial Member has already taken and will provide opportunity to both the parties and will decide the matter in accordance with law.
-
1994 (4) TMI 47 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Burden Of Proof, New Industrial Undertaking, Special Deduction ... ... ... ... ..... retation which is not supported by law, the scope of this section cannot be enlarged. The assessee cannot be entitled to the relief in accordance with this section and if the assessee does not fall within the purview of the exemption, then for the purpose of beneficent legislation, the extended meaning cannot be given. In these circumstances, we are of the view that the assessee has failed to prove that the conditions which have been contemplated under clauses (a) and (b) of Explanations 1 and 2 of clause (4) of section 80J has been complied with. Therefore, the Tribunal was not justified in holding that if used and old machinery is purchased from the open market for the formation of an industrial undertaking it will not be a disqualification under section 801(4)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the purpose of deduction under section 80J of the Act. Consequently, the reference is accordingly answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. No order as to costs.
-
1994 (4) TMI 46 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Business Income, Income From Other Sources, Income Tax Act, Interest On Deposit ... ... ... ... ..... intention to carry on the business of lending of money or money-lending the loan is advanced, the income therefrom would be income from business. The intention has to be gathered with reference to all the activities of advancing money which should be permitted by the objects of the company and also by the resolution of the board of directors to carry on the business of money-lending or lending of money. In the present case from the various provisions referred to above, we find that there is no such provision by which an intention to carry on the business of money-lending could be inferred. Accordingly, the income which has been received by the assessee is to be treated as income from other sources and not business income. Consequently, the reference is answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee, and it is held that the Tribunal was not justified in holding that interest income earned by the assessee should be assessed as business income. No order as to costs.
-
1994 (4) TMI 45 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Advances To Directors, Income Tax Act, Interest On Borrowed Capital, Question Of Law ... ... ... ... ..... cent. and the other two parties were paid interest at the rate of 6 per cent. In these circumstances, the assessee s claim for interest to the extent of Rs. 97,691 was disallowed. We have considered the matter. The question which has to be determined is with regard to the allowance of deduction in accordance with the provisions of section 36(1)(iii) in respect of interest paid on the capital borrowed for the purpose of business. The submission of learned counsel for the respondent is that the said amount was utilised in granting advances without interest or at lesser interest and, therefore, a question of law arises. The Allahabad High Court in CIT v. Modi Pon Ltd. 1989 175 ITR 118 has held that a question of law arises in the circumstances mentioned above. We are also of the opinion that a question of law arises out of the order of the Tribunal, and as such the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is directed to refer the above question of law along with the statement of the case.
-
1994 (4) TMI 44 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Claiming Depreciation, Income From Letting Out, Income From Property, Income Tax Act, Plant And Machinery
-
1994 (4) TMI 43 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Question Of Law, Valuation Of Land, Wealth Tax Act, Wealth Tax Reference ... ... ... ... ..... Deo Joshi s land was submitted before the Commissioner of Wealth-tax, the Department should have taken pains at that stage to show that the valuation of other lands which are in the vicinity is at a higher figure. No document was produced at that stage, nor was it pointed out as to how the valuation of land of Shri Har Deo Joshi was not relevant for the purpose of valuation of the assessee s land. From the various documents and the file we find that there was failure on the part of the Revenue to establish the market value of a comparable case before the appellate authority, i.e., the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) or even before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. A finding which has been arrived at about the valuation of the property is a finding of fact for which no direction could be given under section 27(3) of the Act to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to refer the question. Consequently, we find no merit in the reference applications. They are hereby dismissed.
-
1994 (4) TMI 42 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Additions To Income, Question Of Law ... ... ... ... ..... rence application submitted by the Revenue with regard to the additions had already been dismissed and learned counsel for the Revenue has informed that the matter has not been taken to the apex court and, therefore, the order passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal deleting the additions has become final. In the present case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has set aside the penalty on the ground that the additions have already been deleted and, therefore, no penalty can be levied. The reference application was also dismissed under section 256(1) on the same ground. Since the matter with regard to the additions made in the quantum appeal no longer survives, it is not an appropriate case where a direction should be given to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal for making a reference under section 256 in respect of penalty. As the matter of penalty is qua tax and there is no liability to tax, no penalty can be levied. The reference application having no force is dismissed.
-
1994 (4) TMI 41 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Question Of Law, Unexplained Cash Credits, Wealth Tax Reference ... ... ... ... ..... rectification, and, in respect of question No. 4, it was found that the earlier order of the Tribunal could not be referred and in respect of question No. 5, it was observed that no concealment took place. Hence the reference application was dismissed. We have considered the arguments of learned counsel. We are of the opinion that a question of law does not (sic) arise out of the order of the Tribunal and, therefore, we hereby frame and direct the Tribunal to refer the following question of law, more particularly, that the matter goes to the very root of the jurisdiction of the Tribunal in rectifying its order Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in passing the order rectifying the order dated November 16, 1981, on the basis of the miscellaneous application submitted by the assessee ? The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal shall refer the above question of law arising out of its order and send the same along with the statement of the case. No order as to costs.
-
1994 (4) TMI 40 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Income Tax Act, Question Of Law, Rectification Of Mistakes ... ... ... ... ..... es of Rs. 49,570 as confirmed by the Tribunal in their quantum appeal? (iii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in not affirming the finding given in its original order dated November 14, 1983, in R. T. A. No. 592/ (JP) of 1982 that the assessee-firm failed to distribute profits on suppressed sales of Rs. 1,78,687 and bogus purchases of Rs. 49,570 and, therefore, is not entitled to the registration under the Income-tax Act? The question as to whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has the jurisdiction to rectify the order under section 254(2) of the Income-tax Act is a question of law and requires an interpretation with regard to the jurisdiction of the Tribunal. We are satisfied that the above question of law arises out of the order of the Tribunal and, therefore, direct the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to refer the above question of law along with the statement of case. The application is allowed.
-
1994 (4) TMI 39 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Being Heard, Income Tax Act, Question Of Law ... ... ... ... ..... r of the Commissioner could not be said to have been passed without granting adequate opportunity. We are unable to accept this contention based on the observation of the Supreme Court pertaining to the peculiar facts of that case. What is required by section 263 is that the assessee must be afforded with an opportunity of being heard by the Commissioner with regard to the error which he proposes to revise. Affording any further opportunity after setting aside the order of the Income-tax Officer would not amount to an opportunity of meeting the alleged error in the assessment proposed to be revised. The finding of the Tribunal in the present case that no such opportunity was given to the assessee by the Income-tax Officer is a finding of fact and since the Revenue has not established that that finding is in any way erroneous in law, we do not consider it necessary to call for the statement of the case for reference of such a question to this court. The reference is dismissed.
-
1994 (4) TMI 38 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Alternate Remedy, Income Tax Act ... ... ... ... ..... tailed reply or contest it for proper verdict on reassessment. Needless to say the authority shall consider the objections if raised and decide the same in conformity with law. In sum, I do not feel persuaded to quash the notice on this ground in exercise of this extraordinary jurisdiction. It is manifest and undisputed that the remedy is available on the terms of the statute itself. In Shyam Kishore v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi, AIR 1992 SC 2279, it is held that (at page 2294) . . . . The resort to articles 226 and 227 should be discouraged when there is an alternative remedy. A more satisfactory solution is available on the terms of the statute itself. In the light of what is stated above, I am satisfied that there survives no further case or cause for adjudication in this petition. The petition is, therefore, disposed of finally with observations as above but without any orders as to costs. Respondent No. 2 may now proceed further in the matter in accordance with law.
-
1994 (4) TMI 37 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Capital Or Revenue Expenditure, Collaboration Agreement, Foreign Company, Income Tax Act, New Industrial Undertaking, Special Deduction
-
1994 (4) TMI 36 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Companies Profits Surtax, Company Surtax, Computation Of Capital Reserves, General Reserve ... ... ... ... ..... s and should be included in the capital for the levy of surtax. Question No. 1 is, therefore, answered against the Department. As regards question No. 3, the matter received consideration of the Supreme Court in Vazir Sultan Tobacco Co. Ltd. v. CIT 1981 132 ITR 559, and it was held that dividends declared by the assessee should be deducted from the general reserve for computing the capital for levy of surtax. Since the aforesaid decision squarely applies to the facts of this case, question No. 3 is answered by holding that, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was not right in holding that the dividends declared from the general reserve should not be deducted from the general reserve for computing the capital for levy of surtax. In other words, we hold that the dividends declared should be deducted from the general reserve for computing the capital for levy of surtax. The reference stands answered accordingly. There will be no order as to costs.
-
1994 (4) TMI 35 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Wealth Tax Act ... ... ... ... ..... ded state, could have been exclusively used by the assessees for residential purposes, as contemplated under the latter part of section 5(1)(iv) of the Act. This court, therefore, held that the assessees were not entitled to the exemption under section 5(1)(iv) of the said Act. This decision relates to this very property, though at the instance of a brother of the respondent. All the facts and circumstances of the case are identical and, hence, there is every justification for applying the ratio of this decision to the facts of this case. In view of the aforesaid decision, it is held that in view of the facts and circumstances of this case, the Appellate Tribunal was not correct in law in holding that the benefit of exemption under section 5(1)(iv) of the Wealth-tax Act has to be granted to the assessee for the assessment year 1971-72. In other words, the assessee is not entitled to the said exemption. The reference is answered accordingly. There will be no order as to costs.
-
1994 (4) TMI 34 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Business Income, Income From Other Sources, Money Lending Business ... ... ... ... ..... the said loan. During the assessment year 1971-72, a new loan in the course of money-lending was made to one Ramiah Chettiar and interest income received thereon. Further, interest from the same borrower was received in the subsequent assessment year also. The amounts received by the assessee as interest ranges from Rs. 28,000 in 1966-67 to Rs. 35,312 in 1969-70. Thus, the monies received by the assessee at the family partition has been his stock-in-trade and has been continuously lent by him with a view to earn profit thereon. Even when the money was utilised by the father, it was treated as a loan from the assessee and interest was credited to the assessee s account. We are, therefore, satisfied that the assessee was carrying on the business of money-lending during these assessment years. The interest received on these loan transactions constitute business income. We accordingly answer the questions referred to us in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. No costs.
-
1994 (4) TMI 33 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Additions To Income, Income From Undisclosed Sources, Income Tax Act, Question Of Law ... ... ... ... ..... ircumstances of the case, the learned Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in deleting the addition of Rs. 40,000 made by the Income-tax Officer and upheld by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) on account of unexplained deposit in the name of the assessee s daughter-in-law, Smt. Kiran Lata? (iv) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in deleting the addition of Rs. 89,351 made by the Income-tax Officer and upheld by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) on account of violation of the provisions of section 40A(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ? We have gone through the order of the Tribunal passed in appeal as well as under section 256(1) of the Act declining to refer the questions of law claimed by the Commissioner of Income-tax for the opinion of the High Court. The findings recorded by the Tribunal are findings of fact. No referable question of law arises. The petition is dismissed. No costs.
-
1994 (4) TMI 32 - PATNA HIGH COURT
CBDT Circulars, Factory Building, House Property, Wealth Tax ... ... ... ... ..... ctory building owned by it. We see no error in the said conclusion of the Tribunal. The circular promulgated by the Board of Revenue and referred to hereinabove gives administrative relief to the assessee, and such relief so afforded should be given effect to by all the authorities enforcing the Act. Even if the language of the Act, strictly construed, may not apply to the situation, in view of the circular, the relief will be afforded to the assessee. In this view of the matter, we hold that the Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the factory building owned by the assessee was entitled to exemption under section 5(1)(iv) of the Wealth-tax Act. The question referred to this court is answered in the affirmative, in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. The two references are disposed of as above. Let a copy of this judgment be forwarded to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, A Bench, Patna, under the signature of the Registrar and the seal of this court.
....
|
