|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 221 to 240 of 374 Records
-
1987 (7) TMI 155 - ITAT DELHI-B
Appeal To Appellate Tribunal, Advance Tax, Interest Payable By Assessee On Underestimate, Business Expenditure, Year In Which Deductible
-
1987 (7) TMI 154 - ITAT DELHI-B
Gift Tax, Share Value, Wealth Tax ... ... ... ... ..... the position of the company on the relevant date of gift and then to ascertain the possible value of the shares on that date. We have not accepted the plea of the learned counsel for the assessee to take the figure of loss on the relevant date of gift on time basis. In view of the fact that as per Directors report the position of the company was normal till April, 1978 and it deteriorated rather sharply after that. AB the gift had taken place in the third week of May, 1978, the position as on that date has to be ascertained and the trend of the market has also to be taken into consideration. If it is possible to have the market value of other sugar companies on the nearabout dates, it will give an indication about the extent of fall which was suffered by the sugar companies. With these directions, the appeal is restored to the file of the CGT (Appeals). 11. In the result, the Departmental appeal is dismissed and the appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
-
1987 (7) TMI 153 - ITAT DELHI-A
Assessment Order, Assessment Proceedings, Disclosure Petition, Penalty For Concealment, Voluntary Disclosure, Waiver Or Reduction
-
1987 (7) TMI 152 - ITAT DELHI-A
Appeal Before AAC, Appellate Assistant Commissioner, Revenue Expenditure ... ... ... ... ..... eat the expenditure of Rs. two lakhs to be revenue expenditure and dismiss the appeal of the revenue. 11. The cross-objection of the assessee, as filed, merely seeks to support the decision of CIT (Appeals) and does not seek any fresh relief. The cross-objection is, therefore, redundant. Shri Vaish wanted to modify the cross-objection by filing a modified cross-objection at the time of hearing which sought to agitate a different issue namely CIT (Appeals) had erred in not holding that if the expenditure was held to be of capital, nature, the assessee was entitled to development rebate also in respect of the expenditure in addition to be depreciation allowed by the ITO herself. 12. In our opinion this amounts to raising a new cross-objection, which cannot be permitted to be raised for the first time after the expiry of prescribed limitation period. This modified cross-objection is, therefore, not entertained. The cross-objection of the assessee is dismissed, being infructuous.
-
1987 (7) TMI 151 - ITAT DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... y. He Mentions that, I, therefore, fell that the appellant was not prevented by sufficient cause for not filing the return in time. Looking to the volume of the assessee s business and total commission receipts in a sum of Rs. 1,21,000 which by itself supports huge turn-over of the constituents at the hands of the assessee, the difference in trial balance could not be ruled out and once the explanation was given by the assessee, it was for the Department to have substantiated the same to be false. Under the circumstances, the penalty is hereby cancelled and in the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Narayanan (Vice-President) The facts on record as detailed in paragraph 2 of my learned brother s order, show that the assessee has shown reasonable cause for the default. In the light of this finding of fact, there is no room for a penalty under s. 271(1)(a) of the IT Act. I, therefore, agree with my learned brother, that the penalty in question would stand cancelled.
-
1987 (7) TMI 150 - ITAT COCHIN
Reassessment, Information, Developement Rebate ... ... ... ... ..... ood, is to be examined by the Full Bench of Kerala High Court or the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court in the above decision (delivered on 31-8-1979) held as under The proposition in the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Kalyanji Mavji and Co. v. CIT 1976 102 ITR 287, to the effect that a case where income had escaped assessment due to oversight , Inadvertence or mistake of the ITO must fall within s. 34(1)(b) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, is stated too widely and travels farther than the statute warrants insofar as it can be said to lay down that if, on reappraising the material considered by him during the original assessment, the ITO discovers that he has committed an error in consequence of which income has escaped assessment, it is open to him to reopen the assessment. Thus, in the circumstances of the case, we hold that the reopening of the assessment is not valid and the CIT (A) was right in annulling the same. 7. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.
-
1987 (7) TMI 149 - ITAT COCHIN
A Firm, Accounting Year, Assessment Year, Charitable Or Religious Trust, Income From Property
-
1987 (7) TMI 148 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... the WTO. We have heard both the parties. The cross objections by the assessees have only to be rejected. No claim was made before the WTO. Material for adjudicating the claim was also not available with the WTO. Relief under s. 5(1) is to be computed in the manner laid down under r. 2-I r/w r. 2H of the WT Rules, 1957. The deduction was claimed in M/s Shamsher Nagar Cold Storage, Sirhind which is a partnership firm. Adjudication of the claim under rr. 2-I and 2-H entails details of assets or the balance sheet. Neither the details nor the balance sheet of that firm is available on record of the WTO. The only figure available and assessed to Wealth tax is the credit balance of the capital of the assessee in the said firm. In the ratio of the Supreme Court judgment referred to above, the claim has rightly been rejected by the AAC. 8. In the result, all the cross objections by the assessees and the appeals by the Revenue are dismissed except WTA No. 417 of 1986 which is allowed.
-
1987 (7) TMI 147 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... of wrong finding of facts. We also notice that the sale transactions relied on by him in Sectors 27-A and 9-B, Chandigarh cannot be said to be comparable sales either on point of time or on point of distance in relation to impugned property as held by the Hon ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case referred to by the ld. Counsel for the assessee. Even otherwise, the consideration in these transactions compares favourably with the apparent consideration in relation to the impugned property, and in one case i.e. House No. 631, Sector 27-A, Chandigarh the Competent Authority after having initiated acquisition proceedings has dropped the same. In view of the above discussions, we are of the opinion that the apparent consideration is the real consideration and there is no understatement of the same so as to attract the provisions of Chapter XXA of the Act. We, therefore, vacate the impugned order passed by the Competent Authority. 12. In the result, the appeals are allowed.
-
1987 (7) TMI 146 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... as moved this reference application. Two points were urged by Shri D.K. Gupta the ld. counsel for the assessee. One was that w.e.f. 1st April, 1980 the legislature has introduced Expln. 2 to s. 64 and because of that the question need not be referred. Notwithstanding this Explanation, we had decided to refer this question as the year in dispute is 1979-80 but now the representative of the assessee has brought to out notice a decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court of India in CIT, Bangalore vs. J.K. Gotla reported in (1985) 48 CTR (SC) 363 (1985) 156 ITR 323 (SC) wherein exactly similar question has been decided by their Lordships of the Supreme Court in favour of the assessee. Since now there is a Supreme Court authority which is conclusive on the subject, we think that no useful purpose would be served by referring this question which has become purely academic in view of the Supreme Court authority above-referred to. 4. In the result, the reference application is dismissed.
-
1987 (7) TMI 145 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... was sufficient to cover the loan. What has been only proved is that the loan has been taken from the LIC and it is not certain as to whether loan has been taken on insurance policy. Therefore, the decision of the Karnataka High Court relied upon by the Departmental Representative in the case of D. Basappa vs. CWT (1986) 54 CTR (Kar) 407 (1986) 160 ITR 826 (Kar) will not fully govern the facts in the present case. It is not disputed that the amount of loan was utilised for construction of a house resulting in creation of a taxable asset. Therefore, the AAC s conclusion that the loan should be adjusted against the taxable value of the asset is not inequitable, the total wealth of the assessee is not very large and there is no proof that the insurance policy is the main security of the loan. At best it is a collateral security. Taking into consideration all the circumstances, we are not inclined to interfere with the conclusion of the AAC. The appeals are accordingly dismissed.
-
1987 (7) TMI 144 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... e Tribunal that the statements furnished to the bank were mechanical is a finding of fact. On the basis of the circumstantial evidence, the Tribunal also came to a finding of the fact that the statements furnished to the bank were motivated. In view of this position, the entire addition made by the ITO was deleted. This also covered the deletion already allowed by the CIT of Rs. 1,01,184. The Tribunal also agreed with the reduction allowed by the CIT. At the same time the Tribunal observed that since the entire addition made by the ITO had been deleted by the Tribunal, this exercise was only academic. The above deletion by the Tribunal was because of certain findings of fact. Therefore, no question of law arises so far as R.A. No. 93 of 1987 is concerned. Similarly question in R.A. No. 94 of 1987 is only consequential and academic. No referable question out of this reference application, therefore, also arises. 3. In the result, both the reference applications are dismissed.
-
1987 (7) TMI 143 - ITAT CALCUTTA-C
Business Expenditure, Business Deduction or Loss, Remission Or Cessation Of Trading Liability, Deduction Of Tax At Source
-
1987 (7) TMI 142 - ITAT CALCUTTA-B
Advance Tax, Interest Payable By Assessee ... ... ... ... ..... 147. The case of Saraya Distillery is altogether on different point. In that case non-charging of interest under section 215 by the ITO was taken as erroneous by the Commissioner and he by virtue of his power under section 263 revised the said assessment order. 3. Next it is contended by learned counsel for the assessee that section 217(1A) is not applicable to the case of the assessee since the assessee was not the person who was required to send an estimate under section 209A (4) or a person referred to in section 212(3A). We do not enter into this point since no facts are available for making investigation on this point. Suffice it to say that the order of the ITO charging interest under section 217(1A) suffers from non-disclosure of the grounds for charging such interest. Naturally the assessee could not get any opportunity to defend against making such levy. The order of the ITO is, therefore, not sustainable even on this score. 4. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.
-
1987 (7) TMI 141 - ITAT BOMBAY-D
Computation Of Capital, Capital ... ... ... ... ..... d be excluded from its capital. 6. Before parting, we may mention that the learned counsel for the assessee had argued that when there are two conflicting decisions of High Courts on a point, the decision in favour of the assessee should invariably be followed in preference to the decision in favour of the department. We are unable to accept this submission. These decisions relied on by him do not lay down the proposition made by the learned representative for the assessee. If this principle is correct, then the Tribunal would be bound to follow the decision of one High Court which is in favour of the assessee in spite of the fact that large number of High Courts have decided the point against the assessee. There is no such principle that when there are conflicting decisions of the High Courts, one in favour of the assessee should invariably be followed by the Tribunal. The Tribunal has to apply its mind and to come to its own conclusion. 7. The appeal fails and is dismissed.
-
1987 (7) TMI 140 - ITAT BOMBAY-D
Depreciation ... ... ... ... ..... paid for acquiring leasehold rights, Rs. 18,773 representing adjudication charges and Rs. 4,024 representing registration charges and that the last two items should be allowed as revenue deduction. Certain decisions were cited in support of this claim. We are unable to accept this submission. Such claim was not made in the original assessment order. It was also not made before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). This claim does not arise out of the order of the learned Commissioner. In the appeal against order under section 263 of the Act, a claim of this nature cannot be entertained. We, accordingly, do not accept the said claim. 8. We may mention here that the learned Departmental Representative had argued that these amounts were not allowable as revenue expenditure and that the decisions cited on behalf of the assessee were distinguishable. 9. For the reasons given above, we uphold the order made by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax. 10. The appeal is dismissed.
-
1987 (7) TMI 139 - ITAT BOMBAY-C
Accounting Year, Carrying On Business, Cash Credits, Income From Business, Income From Other Sources
-
1987 (7) TMI 138 - ITAT BOMBAY-C
Accounting Year, Carrying On Business, Cash Credits, Income From Business, Income From Other Sources
-
1987 (7) TMI 137 - ITAT BOMBAY-B
... ...
... ... ..... e Department is now precluded from proceeding directly against the trust in view of the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of V.H. Sheth and Ors. For this additional reason also, the assessee is entitled to succeed. 9. In the result, we would hold that the CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the order of the ITO. We direct that the assessments should be made under s. 161 of the Act on the beneficiaries in respect of their shares in the income of the trust which are known and determinate. There will be no direct assessment on the trust under s. 164 of the Act. We accordingly allow the assessee s appeal. Since we have held that there will be no direct assessment and allowed the first two grounds of appeal, the third ground becomes infructuous because the question of considering additions made by the ITO in the hands of the trust would not arise. The third ground is therefore dismissed as redundant. 10. In the result, the appeal will be treated as allowed in part.
-
1987 (7) TMI 136 - ITAT BOMBAY-A
... ...
... ... ..... taken into account while valuing the interest of a partner in a firm. The entry in question falls clearly within r. 2D(d) and the AAC was right in deleting the addition inasmuch as it was only a fictitious asset and the balance-sheet did not reflect any true asset on account of the entry made on 31st Dec., 1977. Reliance was also placed upon the Circular of the CBDT bearing No.96, dt. 25th Nov., 1972. According to the instructions of the Board, no attempt should be made to include the value of the goodwill unless it is actually paid for by the assessee. This is not a case where any payment had been made and the entry in question was only a book entry caused to present a better picture of the assets though in fact the firm did not in reality enjoy goodwill to that extent. Taking all these facts into consideration, we are clearly of the view that the AAC was right in deleting the addition made by the WTO in the two assessments under consideration. 5. The appeals are dismissed.
............
|
