|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 241 to 260 of 339 Records
-
1997 (10) TMI 99 - ITAT GAUHATI
Appellate Tribunal ... ... ... ... ..... e facts of the case inasmuch as the above legal propositions are in no way being violated and rather it is in conformity therewith that we have appreciated the facts of the case in the light of the relevant provision of the statute and the rules. The very object of inserting Explanation to Rule 9 of the Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963 is to facilitate the early filing of appeal by dispensing with the necessity of keeping on waiting for the availability of duly certified copy strictly so-called, and thereby expedite the delivery of justice. The object of the said provision obviously cannot be to help the appellant make the matters pend and linger on by waiting for a certified copy so as to file the appeal not for a few days but for not less than several hundred days. 12. In view of our above discussions we find that this appeal by the revenue is time-barred by 804 days and we do not find any sufficient cause for the said delay. We, therefore, dismiss this appeal as time-barred.
-
1997 (10) TMI 98 - ITAT DELHI-E
A Firm, Assessing Officer, Assessment Year, Orders Prejudicial To Interests, Total Income ... ... ... ... ..... ,06,93,010 claimed by the assessee in the purchase and sale of units of UTI, 1964, etc., as per details discussed hereinbefore and (ii) with regard to the dividend income on such units of UTI as discussed and decided in earlier paragraphs of this order. 7. The assessee has also raised a ground relating to directions given by the CIT in the order under section 263 asking the Assessing Officer that action under sections 276C and 277 of Income-tax Act, 1961 may also be examined. Such directions given by the CIT are clearly beyond the scope of section 263 of Income-tax Act, 1961. No such findings can be validly given while considering the question as to whether the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. The directions so given by the CIT are, therefore, directed to be deleted. 8. In the result, the order passed by the CIT under section 263 is modified to the extent indicated in the various paras of this order
-
1997 (10) TMI 97 - ITAT DELHI-D
... ...
... ... ..... 2 raised by the Department relates to deletion of disallowance of Rs. 21,582 being the amount given to employees at the time of marriages. 16.1. The learned Departmental Representative and the learned counsel advanced the same arguments before us as in the case of similar ground for asst. yr. 1987-88. 16.2. Keeping in view our decision on the aforesaid ground in the appeal for asst. yr. 1987-88, we decline to interfere with the orders of the learned CIT(A) on this issue. 17. Ground No. 3 raised by the Department relates to deletion of disallowance of Rs. 11,458 on account of payment of fines for traffic violations. 17.1. The learned Departmental Representative and the learned counsel advanced the same arguments as were advanced in relation to similar ground for asst. yr. 1987-88. 17.2. Keeping in view our decision on similar ground for asst. yr. 1987-88 we restore the orders of the AO in relation to this addition. 18. In the result, all the three appeals are allowed in part.
-
1997 (10) TMI 96 - ITAT DELHI
Assessment Year, Bona Fide, Failure To File Return, Tax At Source ... ... ... ... ..... her dictum was prescribed DE NON MINIMIS CURAT LEX (Law does not take into account trivialities). 7. Levy Ullmann, the great French jurist says that a definition of law should have two aims---firstly, to make precise the meaning of law, and secondly to call up in the mind of the reader a true picture of law and its operation. 8. Coming now to the facts of the present case, I find that the assessee had no intention to the violate the law. Due amount of tax was deducted. It was paid to credit of the Government in time. Only Form 26A was not filed. Having regard to the facts of the case, in my opinion, it is not a circumstance alliunde to which penalty can be sustained, as I find that there existed a bona fide belief in not furnishing Form No. 26A. This, in my opinion, is a reasonable cause. Assessee can, therefore, be exonerated from the rigour of penalty. I, therefore, direct the Assessing Officer to delete the same. 9. In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed.
-
1997 (10) TMI 95 - ITAT COCHIN
Deductions, Profit ... ... ... ... ..... sub-section 3(b) that would make section 80AB unworkable. In the above circumstances we hold that the provisions of clause (b) of sub-section (3) have no application in computing the profit derived by the assessee from the export of specified goods or merchandise as the assessee is not having any other export business in non-specified goods. The CIT(Appeals) is therefore not justified in giving direction to compute the relief under section 80HHC in accordance with the provisions of subsection (3)(b) on a proportion of all the profits of the various business activities including the agency business, steamer agency, etc. Accordingly, we reverse the order of the CIT(Appeals) and restore the order of the Assessing Officer to the effect that the assessee is not entitled to the relief under section 80HHC in the absence of any profit derived from the export of specified goods or merchandise included in the gross total income. 8. In the result, this appeal by the Revenue is allowed.
-
1997 (10) TMI 94 - ITAT CALCUTTA-E
Leasing Business, Actual Cost ... ... ... ... ..... case. 22. Vide Ground No. 3, revenue contends that the learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in deleting the addition on account of under changes received by the assessee but not disclosed in the taxable income. Learned departmental representative submitted that the issue is covered against the assessee and further submitted that the Commissioner (Appeals) is not justified in deleting the addition. Learned senior counsel has not seriously opposed the ground. We, therefore, set aside the order of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) on this issue. 23. The revenue s appeal is filed by a delay of 13 days. Condonation petition was filed explaining the reasons for the delay in filing the appeal. On hearing the rival submissions and upon careful perusal of the reasons for the delay in filing the appeal, we are satisfied that the delay in filing the appeal is due to reasonable cause. We, therefore, condone the delay. 24. In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is partly allowed.
-
1997 (10) TMI 93 - ITAT BOMBAY-E
Double Taxation Relief ... ... ... ... ..... us or regular business activity. Assessee s vessel being in India only for 21/2 months cannot be said to be of enduring continuity nor could it be said in this case that there was a virtual projection of the assessee into the soil of India. Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in Boudier Christian v. ITO 1993 46 ITD 114 held that where the foreign company provided only technical services but did not itself carry on drilling, it was not a case of a permanent establishment. In the present case also, the assessee provided services for inspection of tubes and did not in connection with extraction of oil, etc. 13. For the details discussions aforesaid, we hold that there was no permanent establishment of the assessee in India within the meaning of Article 5 of DTA and, therefore, its profits would be taxable in U.K. only by virtue of Article 7 of DTA. The order of the CIT(A), therefore, does not call for any interference and is accordingly upheld. 4. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.
-
1997 (10) TMI 92 - ITAT BANGALORE
... ...
... ... ..... tation of total income. (v) The learned Departmental Representative has relied on the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of Modi Spg. and Wvg. Mills Co. Ltd. vs. CIT. But, in our opinion, this decision is distinguishable on facts. 7. In our opinion, the case law relied on behalf of the assessee do support its case. In this case, the assessee has paid bank guarantee only for releasing the goods which were seized by the Department in the course of the search. Therefore, the assessee was forced to pay the amount for releasing the goods and it is the case of the assessee that the goods were sold and earned profits and it was offered for taxation. Therefore, we agree with the contention of the assessee that the amount was paid in connection with its business. Therefore, it has to be treated as revenue expenditure and has to be allowed. In the circumstances, we uphold the order of the CIT(A) deleting the addition. 8. In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed.
-
1997 (10) TMI 91 - ITAT BANGALORE
... ...
... ... ..... der the head Sundry creditors is not sufficient information. This is one of those few cases where the AO had not paid the necessary concentration while completing the assessment for the first time in regard to the first assessment proceedings. Therefore, for the deficiency in the completion of the assessment at the first time, the AO cannot use the tool of reopening of the assessment. This tool has to be used sparingly where the circumstances as are necessary for using the tool are clearly evident. In the instant case, as observed earlier, it was a case of change of opinion. Therefore, even on jurisdictional aspect, we have to uphold the claim of the assessee and on that basis we quash the assessment proceedings. 8. For the asst. yr. 1983-84 the issue related to the payment of commission as above. For the detailed reasons given earlier, we uphold the claim of the assessee for the year under appeal also. 9. In the result, the appeals for both the assessment years are allowed.
-
1997 (10) TMI 90 - ITAT BANGALORE
Dissolution Of Firm, Status ... ... ... ... ..... the case of CIT v. H.S. Shivarudrappa 1993 200 ITR 1. In that case, it was held that if compensation be paid in instalments in respect of acquisition of buses by the State Government, the instalment due in the relevant previous year is alone assessable and not the entire compensation. On the other hand, the departmental contention for assessing the entire amount of compensation awarded in this year is based on another judgment of the Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT v. Sheshappa Hegde 1984 150 ITR 164/16 Taxman 331. 6. Since we have already held the impugned assessment to be invalid from two different angles, we do not consider it necessary to go into the merits of the case. We are, therefore, leaving this particular issue open inasmuch as the issue has become infructuous. Ultimately, we cancel the impugned assessment order by reversing the order of the CIT (Appeals). 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partially allowed to the abovementioned extent.
-
1997 (10) TMI 89 - ITAT BANGALORE
Prejudicial To The Interests Of Revenue, Books Of Accounts, Branch Accounts ... ... ... ... ..... ble Supreme Court held that interest paid by the bank on moneys borrowed from its various depositors had to be allowed in its entirety under section 10(2)(iii) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, and there was no warrant for disallowing a proportionate part of the interest referable to moneys borrowed for the purchase of securities whose interest was tax-free. In the present case also, some of the borrowals was interest free. (b) In the case of Maharashtra Sugar Mills Ltd. it is held that the entire managing agency commission was laid out or expended for the purpose of the business carried on by the assessee and was allowable under section 10(2)(xv) of the IT Act, 1922 and that the fact that the income from a part of the business was not exigible to tax under the Act was not a relevant circumstance. 8. Following, with respect, the above two judgments of the Hon ble Supreme Court, we also hold, in favour of the assessee, on merits also. 9. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1997 (10) TMI 88 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-C
... ...
... ... ..... ture of receipts the netting of expenditure on account of interest cannot be allowed because for the purpose of turnover under s. 80HHC the Revenue is concerned with the gross receipts and not with the net receipts. In support of his contentions he relied upon the decisions relied upon by the CIT(A) and reported in 221 ITR 130 (sic) and 130 ITR 84 (sic). 8.3 We have considered the rival submissions and perused the facts on record. The controversy before us is not that the interest income was not attributable to the business activities and the controversy is with regard to only whether net interest is to be taken as against gross interest as part of the turn over. In our opinion, the view propounded by the assessee s counsel is the correct view in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Keshavji Raowjee and Co. We direct the AO accordingly to adopt only the net figure of interest as part of the turnover. 9. In the result, both the appeals are allowed in part.
-
1997 (10) TMI 87 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-B
... ...
... ... ..... nce brought on record during penalty proceedings the penalty levied cannot be justified. 20. We have also perused the various case laws cited by the Revenue in support of the penalty levied and we find that the facts of those cases are different and distinguishable and ratio of those decisions are not fully applicable to the present case. Moreover, in the case reported in (1989) 179 ITR 628 (P and H), (1988) 169 ITR 782 (All), (1982) 144 ITR 133 (MP), (1987) 168 ITR 1 (Ker) penalty has been levied invoking the old Explanation under s. 271(1)(c), i.e., for the period prior to 1st April, 1976 and since the present case falls in the later period the ratio of those decisions is otherwise not applicable. 21. Having considered all the facts and circumstances of the case we are of the opinion that it is not a fit case for levy of penalty under s. 271(1)(c) both on facts and law and accordingly the same is directed to be cancelled. 22. In the result the assessee s appeal is allowed.
-
1997 (10) TMI 86 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-B
... ...
... ... ..... ities below and accordingly impugned penalty is cancelled. 12. In ITA No. 1185/Ahd/92 the assessee s grievance is against penalty of Rs. 3,870 imposed by the AO under s. 273(2)(a) of the Act. The said order of AO was confirmed by the CIT(A). 13. In view of our findings given in ITA No. 835/Ahd/92, we also set aside the order under challenge. While deciding ITA No. 835/Ahd/92 we have given the detailed reasons for setting aside the penalty order. As we have already held that the AO had not initiated any penalty proceedings during the course of assessment proceedings. The AO has also failed to record his satisfaction during the course of such proceedings. In these circumstances, we are of the view that the order of AO dt. 8th Jan., 1991, imposing penalty of Rs. 3,870 under s. 273(2)(a) of the Act was not a valid order under the law and the CIT(A) was not justified in law to confirm the same. Accordingly the penalty is cancelled. 14. In the result, both the appeals are allowed.
-
1997 (10) TMI 85 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-A
... ...
... ... ..... by the AO. The assessee filed the revised returns suo moto. If the AO had a prima facie belief of concealment that would not mean detection by the Revenue. The dictionary meaning of word detect is to discover the truth especially hidden or disguised character. In the instant case, the Revenue has neither discovered the truth especially hidden nor disguised character. At the same time DVO s report cannot be made the basis for the addition particularly when no opportunity was afforded to the assessee to cross-examine the DVO. The DVO himself admitted that the estimate of cost of construction reflected in his report was on higher side. The estimate of the AO too is without any basis. In these circumstances, it cannot be said that Revenue has detected the concealment because, no material was found by the AO to show that there was concealment. We, therefore, uphold the impugned orders and dismiss the Revenue s appeals. 24. In the result, all the appeals of Revenue are dismissed.
-
1997 (10) TMI 84 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
Revision applications - Jurisdiction - Modvat ... ... ... ... ..... he proper officer by way of acceptance letters were enclosed with the respondents written submissions dated 17-1-1996 (O/o No. K III/98/96) and that the export documents viz., AR-4 were filed with the Assistant Commissioner (Refunds) for acceptance, the acknowledgement for due deposit of these documents were attached with their refund claims (O/o No. K III/274/96). That being the case, when exports are under DEEC scheme no drawback is normally claimed. Any doubts on this score could be got clarified from the appropriate Customs authority by inter departmental correspondence and then confronted the respondents for mis-declaration etc. Equally, the same applies to the acceptance of proof of exports by Assistant Commissioner (Refunds). Having not done so, merely asking the respondents to furnish all the original documents, which are in any case not with them, is nothing but harassment and is viewed seriously. 12. The Show Cause Notice dated 31-7-1997 is disposed of accordingly.
-
1997 (10) TMI 83 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Writ - Territorial jurisdiction - Confiscation ... ... ... ... ..... maintained in this Court. Consequently, we are unable to approve of the view taken by the learned single Judge in this regard, and we set aside the same. 9.Having regard to the view taken by us that this Court has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the main writ petition itself, we consider it in appropriate and wholly unnecessary to deal with the other grounds also, on which the learned single Judge has chosen to accord relief to the respondents herein. The conclusions arrived at and the observations made in this regard by the Single Judge are, therefore, set aside. It is always open to the respondents to vindicate their rights before the appropriate Court having jurisdiction over Ahmedabad, the place in which the seizure has been affected and the order of confiscation came to be passed. The writ appeal, therefore, is allowed on this only ground. But, in the circumstances of the case, there will be no order, as to costs. Consequently, CMP No. 8555 of 1997 is dismissed.
-
1997 (10) TMI 82 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Prosecution (Customs) - Evidence ... ... ... ... ..... rged - (1) If, upon taking all the evidence referred to in Section 244, the Magistrate considers, for reasons to be recorded, that no case against the accused has been made out which, if unrebutted, would warrant his conviction, the Magistrate shall discharge him. Nothing in this section shall be deemed to prevent a(2) Magistrate from discharging the accused at any previous stage of the case if, for reasons to be recorded by such Magistrate he considers the charge to be groundless. 11.In the light of the above decisions, I do not find any good and sufficient reason to interfere with the order of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate dated 14-9-1994, refusing to discharge the petitioner at the stage of framing the charges as in his opinion, sufficient materials are available for framing the charges. 12.In the result, revision petition is dismissed with the liberty to the petitioner to raise all his submissions on merits before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Coimbatore.
-
1997 (10) TMI 81 - HIGH COURT ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
Rolling Mills ... ... ... ... ..... take into consideration such objections and points raised by the petitioner and decide the annual capacity and other relevant facts based thereon. 10. It is further submitted that in a given case, it is possible that the products may be marketed at the end of the roughing mill and also at the end of the finishing mill. If that is the case, the Commissioner may also decide as to the annual capacity of production of the petitioner duly taking into consideration those factors. We direct the Commissioner to make final determination within one month of the receipt of a copy of this order. 11. We are, however, not inclined to accept the contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner that pending determination, the petitioner may be permitted to pay the duty on the basis of the (d) factor given by the petitioner. The petitioner shall pay the duty as determined provisionally by the second respondent pending final determination. 12. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly.
-
1997 (10) TMI 80 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... d by the respondents are wood roughly squared and half squared and not further manufactured classifiable under Heading 44.03 of the Customs Tariff. The said finding is a finding arrived at on the basis of evidence. No ground is made out for interference with the said finding in appeal. The appeals are, therefore, dismissed. No order as to costs.
....
|
