|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 301 to 320 of 437 Records
-
1997 (3) TMI 137 - ITAT DELHI-A
... ...
... ... ..... observed that the assessee had filed the application with the Settlement Commission on 31st May, 1988, i.e., on the next day after filing of the revised return for that year on 30th May, 1988. The said application was rejected by the Settlement Commission on26th April, 1991. Thus, in terms of the provisions of Expln. 1(v), a period of 2 years 10 months and 25 days will have to be excluded. The normal period for making the assessment for asst. yr. 1987-88 was upto 31st March, 1990 and if we add the period of 2 years 10 months and 25 days the time available with the AO for framing assessment in relation to asst. yr. 1987-88 will be beyond 31st Oct., 1992, the date on which the assessment has been made. Thus, the assessment for the asst. yr. 1987-88 is in order and the orders of the learned CIT(A) do not call for any interference in relation to that year. 7. In the result, while appeals for asst. yrs. 1980-81 to 1986-87 are allowed, the appeal for asst. yr. 1987-88 is dismissed.
-
1997 (3) TMI 136 - ITAT DELHI
Assessing Officer, Assessment Year, Bona Fide, Reasonable Cause ... ... ... ... ..... ght have submitted the auditors report along with the original return, which might not have been found available by the Assessing Officer when he took up the case for hearing. Such probabilities are indicated by the fact that in the audited balance sheet and profit and loss account annexed with the return, there is a clear reference of the fact of auditors report of even date under reference to which the auditors had signed the said balance sheet. Even assuming that the report was inadvertently not annexed with the return, such an innocent and inadvertent mistake on the part of the person, who submitted the said return, would constitute a reasonable cause in terms of section 273B of the Act. 6.6 Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the present case, I am of the view that it is not a fit case where any penalty under section 271B can be validly sustained. The Assessing Officer is, therefore, directed to cancel the same. 7. In the result, appeal is allowed.
-
1997 (3) TMI 135 - ITAT DELHI
Annual Value, Assessing Officer, Assessment Year, Income From House Property, Let Out ... ... ... ... ..... lying of the bus. He was unable to furnish any details before me. It was contended on behalf of the assessee before the DCIT (Appeals) that expenses incurred for plying of the bus comes to about 84-45 of the gross receipts. Certain details regarding daily expenditure on diesel, salary and fooding, etc., were also furnished. However, it is an undisputed and admitted fact that the assessee did not maintain any accounts in respect of income from plying of the said bus. Therefore, resort to estimation of such income made by the authorities below is perfectly justified. However, I find that the estimate of income made by the Assessing Officer is excessive. I, therefore, direct to the Assessing Officer to allow deduction in respect of various expenses including depreciation on the bus at 80 per cent of the gross receipts estimated by the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer is directed to compute the amount of relief accordingly. 24. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed.
-
1997 (3) TMI 134 - ITAT CALCUTTA-D
A Partner, A Partner, Assessment Year, Assessment Year, Business Expenditure, Partnership Firm, Partnership Firm
-
1997 (3) TMI 133 - ITAT BANGALORE
Assessment Year ... ... ... ... ..... at levy of additional tax is not appealable, the Allahabad High Court has actually held that an intimation under section 143(1)(a) itself is not appealable. Since this is the only decision of a High Court, though not of the jurisdictional High Court on this particular issue, certainly this judgment has got a persuasive value. Hence, we feel ourselves inclined to follow the ratio decidendi of the said judgment. We also find that the assessee had an alternative remedy of filing a rectification petition and getting the matter disposed of in its favour even by way of filing appeals in case of refusal to carry out the rectification, if any. Instead of treading along the aforesaid straight course, the assessee wants to get its appeal admitted when the appeal does not at all lie against the intimation. Finally, we agree with the learned CIT(Appeals) that an intimation under section 143(1)(a) is not appealable as such. 11. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.
-
1997 (3) TMI 132 - ITAT BANGALORE
Assessing Officer, Assessment Proceedings, Assessment Year, Interest On Sticky Loans, Original Assessment, Reassessment Proceedings, Supreme Court
-
1997 (3) TMI 131 - ITAT AMRITSAR
... ...
... ... ..... jurisdictional High Court. Ld. DR could not produce any authority taking a contrary view of the provision under consideration under the Income-tax Act, 1961. If the other view that the ITO is not bound by directions of the appellate authority (which may appear or be infact erroneous) is accepted then such an approach would spread anarchy in the hierarchy of judicial system and affect judicial discipline. In the above background it has to be held that the ITO was wrong in not passing order under section 163 treating Shri Sudershan Kumar as agent of non-resident before making assessment in spite of specific directions and two opportunities provided to him. There is no case to allow fresh opportunity to the ITO now to pass fresh order. His assessment order passed has to be held to be vitiated and bad in law. For above reasons, I entirely agree with the approach of Ld. Accountant Member. 15. Now, the file should be placed before the regular Bench for passing an appropriate order.
-
1997 (3) TMI 130 - ITAT AMRITSAR
Assessing Officer, Assessment Year, Profits And Gains, Regular Assessment, Supreme Court ... ... ... ... ..... light of the provisions of section 44AC read with sections 28 to 43C, as the assessment made under section 143(1)(a) cannot be called a regular assessment in view of the expression regular assessment defined in section 2(40) of the Income-tax Act amended by the Finance Act, 1990 w.e.f. 1-4-1989. In view of the said definition, regular assessment means assessment made under sub-section (3) of section 143 or section 144. In this connection, reference may also be made to the Explanation inserted under section 143 of the Income-tax Act by the Finance (No.2) Act, 1991 w.e.f. 1-10-1991, which provides that an intimation sent to the assessee under sub-section (1) or sub-section (1B) shall be deemed to be an order for the purpose of sections 246 and 264. However, the intention of the said Explanation was only to provide for appeal against an order made under section 143(1)(a). Thus, the order of the learned CIT is confirmed. 4. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.
-
1997 (3) TMI 129 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-C
... ...
... ... ..... ity competent to impose the penalty will be justified in refusing to impose penalty, when there is a technical or venial breach of the provisions of the Act or where the breach flow from a bona fide belief that the offender is not liable to act in the manner prescribed by the statute. In the present case the assessee prepared and filed annual return in Form No. 27A immediately on return of the accountant from sickness. The ratio of the aforesaid decision of the Hon ble apex Court squarely applies to the facts of the present case. 6.1 Considering all the facts and circumstances discussed we are of the opinion that the delay in furnishing the copies of declaration in Form No. 15H was on account of sickness of the accountant and that constituted reasonable and sufficient cause for failure contemplated in s. 272A(2)(f) within the meaning of s. 273B. The penalty levied, therefore, deserves to be cancelled and we order accordingly. 7. In the result, the assessee s appeal succeeds.
-
1997 (3) TMI 128 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-A
... ...
... ... ..... id to Shri S.K. Behal, managing director of the company, on the ground that the ceiling for perquisites under s. 40A(5) is 1/5th of the salary and the excess of 20 per cent of the salary has been rightly disallowed under s. 40A(5). In view of our findings given in ITA No. 4873/A/91 for the asst. yr. 1987-88, we allow this ground also and consequently, delete the disallowance of Rs. 12,435. 5. The next ground raised by the assessee in this appeal reads as under In the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Dy. CIT(A)-I, Baroda has again erred in confirming the working of s. 80-I deduction made by the learned Dy. CIT(Asstt.) Spl. Range-2, Baroda, to the tune of Rs. 159100. 5.1 In view of our findings given in ITA No. 4873/A/91 for the asst. yr. 1987-88, we allow this ground also. The relief under s. 80-I of the Act at the admissible rate of 25 per cent of gross income of Rs. 7,95,509 which would work out to Rs. 1,98,877. 6. In the result, both the appeals are allowed.
-
1997 (3) TMI 127 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-A
Assessment Year, Reduction Or Waiver ... ... ... ... ..... isclosure petition, filed the revised returns notices were issued under section 148 by the Income-tax Officer to regularise assessments, and the assessee fully co-operated with the revenue in the matter of finalisation of assessments. Under the circumstances, we hold that the assessee deserves concession in respect of the quantum of penalty in view of the above co-operative attitude. In our view the minimum penalty, i.e., at the rate of 100 per cent will meet the ends of justice. To sum up the Assessing Officer will levy minimum penalty for concealment of Rs. 54 lacs and Rs. 78 lacs in the assessment year 1985-86 and for concealment of Rs. 54 each in the assessment years 1986-87 and 1987-88. 8.1 So far as the penalty in respect of addition of Rs. 2,98,217 for the assessment year 1987-88 is concerned, this addition has been deleted by us in Income-tax Appeal No. 4988/Ahd./91. So no penalty is leviable in respect of this amount. 9. In the result, the appeals are allowed in part
-
1997 (3) TMI 126 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-A
Assessment Year, Capital Gains On Sale ... ... ... ... ..... the assessee was concerned. Obviously the amount was paid for getting the interest whereas in the case before us here was no such liability incurred by the assessee. Accordingly, the facts of the case relied upon by the learned counsel are distinguishable from the facts of the case before us and the ratio laid down there is of no assistance to the assessee. 10. In the light of above discussion, we hold that the assessee was not entitled to a deduction of Rs. 14,33,000 while computing the capital gains on sale of her share in the property known as Samir . We, accordingly, reverse the findings of the CIT (Appeals) and restore those of the Assessing Officer. 11. In the cross objection, the assessee has simply supported the order of the CIT(A). Since we have reversed the order of the CIT(Appeals), we do not agree with the contents of the C.O. and, accordingly, dismiss it. 12. In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is allowed and the assessee s cross-objection is dismissed
-
1997 (3) TMI 125 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
Rebate - Export of Tea ... ... ... ... ..... A(2) would reveal that when drawback on packing materials upon exports of tea has been, admittedly, availed then rebate claim on tea cannot be granted. And hence the lower authorities orders cannot be assailed on this score. 8.Quite independently, Govt. vide its decision in the case of M/s. Swatantra Bharat Mills - 1993 (68) E.L.T. 504 (G.O.I.) has held that applicants may be allowed to avail rebate claims under Rule 191A in preference to the claim of drawback provided the amount of drawback already paid to them was refunded. Rule 12A is akin to Rule 191A. Hence Govt. in the interest of export promotion and to be fair to the applicant in the circumstances of the instant case would not be averse to granting of rebate subject to their depositing back the drawback amount paid to them. 9.In the result, the revision application would succeed provided the option given in para 8 supra is acceptable to the applicant and is complied with within 3 months. 10.It is ordered accordingly.
-
1997 (3) TMI 124 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Seizure - Customs - Writ jurisdiction ... ... ... ... ..... ds. The address on the baggage receipt is not written by any of the petitioners, but, the same has been written by the Air Passenger and counter-signed by the Baggage Inspector as well as the Superintendent at the Trivandrum Airport. The second Respondent ought to have made enquiries with the concerned Officers at the Trivandrum Airport and not with the Assistant Commissioner, Customs, Trichy. According to me, the materials collected by the Second respondent were not sufficient to connect the contravention alleged. The goods are seized long after they have been actually imported or brought as personal baggage by bona fide passengers and there being no direct evidence to identify such goods either having been imported without proper licence or of illicit origin, the seizure cannot be justified and the penalty imposed is beyond the jurisdiction of the Customs Authority. 44.Hence, for the reasons stated above, allow the Writ Petition. However, there will be no order as to costs.
-
1997 (3) TMI 123 - SC ORDER
Reference to High Court ... ... ... ... ..... re involved and a reference thereof ought to have been called for. It would be open to the High Court to answer the question having regard to the law as it stands. 4. The appeal is allowed. The order under appeal is set aside. The appellant s application to the High Court to call for a reference is allowed. The Tribunal shall make the reference as required. No order as to costs.
-
1997 (3) TMI 122 - SC ORDER
Interest - Rate ... ... ... ... ..... payable till it was paid or recovered was uncalled for in view of the fact that the point of law had remained undecided at least until 18th October, 1994. Reference was made to the judgment of this Court in Kashyap Zip Industries v. Union of India, 1993 (64) E.L.T. 161 where, in somewhat similar circumstances, the rate of interest was reduced to 12 per annum. 4. We are of the view that there was uncertainty about the law until the decision in the case of Kasinka Trading was rendered on 18th October, 1994, and that, therefore, interest from the date it became payable until 18th October, 1994, should be payable at the rate of 12 per annum. Interest for the further period should be at the rate of 17.5 per annum, as ordered by the High Court. Calculations shall be made accordingly and the balance and interest as aforesaid due by the appellants shall be paid to the respondents within 8 weeks. 5. The appeals are allowed to the aforesaid extent. There shall be no order as to costs.
-
1997 (3) TMI 121 - SUPREME COURT
Valuation of goods - Manufacturer ... ... ... ... ..... ned Counsel for the Revenue was based on the decision of this Court recorded in the case of Union of India v. Delhi Cloth and General Mills Co. Ltd. - 1977 (1) E.L.T. (J 199) (S.C.) AIR 1963 SC 791 wherein this Court in paragraph 18 referred to the definition of manufacturer. The Counsel submitted that the inclusive clause in the definition would have a bearing on the question as to who can be said to be the manufacturer and this aspect too would have to be gone into by the Tribunal. 3. In view of the above, both the learned Counsel agree that the impugned judgment may be set aside and the matter may be remanded to the Tribunal for disposal in accordance with law, in particular, as developed from the decision in Ujagar Prints and Delhi Cloth Mills referred to hereinbefore. The appeal will stand disposed of accordingly. Having regard to the fact that this is an old matter, the Tribunal may consider giving it priority for disposal. There will, however, be no order as to costs.
-
1997 (3) TMI 120 - SUPREME COURT
Manufacture - Drilling, trimming and chamfering ... ... ... ... ..... en adopting a particular process, if a transformation takes place, which makes the product have a character and use of its own, which it did not bear earlier, then the process would amount to manufacture within the meaning of Section 2(f) irrespective of the fact whether there has been a single process or have been several processes. 2. The learned Single Judge from whose judgment the Division Bench was considering the appeal had pointed out that brake lining blanks could not be used by owners of motor vehicles without holes and trimming and chamfering. The learned Single Judge also pointed out that it was only after this process which the blank brake linings underwent that they could be used by automobile manufacturers in the manufacture of their vehicles. We are of the opinion that both the learned Single Judge as well as the Division Bench applied the correct test and we see no reason to interfere therewith. The appeals are, therefore, dismissed with no order as to costs.
-
1997 (3) TMI 119 - HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
Dutiability of fabrication and assembly ... ... ... ... ..... er the Division Bench of this Court or the Supreme Court. We are unable to agree with this submission. In our opinion, both this Court and the Supreme Court have considered the position of the intermediate parts and also the final product and they have laid down a clear dictum that they would be excisable goods as defined in the Act only when they are marketable or capable of being marketable. They also made it clear that law on this issue is fairly settled. With respect and with no hesitation, we follow the dictum of the Supreme Court and hold that the goods manufactured by the petitioner, as has been analysed by the Department, are not liable to excise duty. 14.In the result, we allow the writ petition, quash the order dated 10-3-1988 passed by the second respondent as per Annexure-O as also the order dated 30-9-1988 passed by the third respondent as per Annexure-P and consequently, direct that if any duty is collected, the Department must refund the same to the petitioner.
-
1997 (3) TMI 118 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Confiscation and penalty - Customs - Conveyance, vessel ... ... ... ... ..... 115(2), at any rate, in the cases of the nature, where there are evidence on record, on the basis of which, the adjudicating Authority as a fact finds and was satisfied that the contraband goods recovered from the ship could not have been present or carried without the knowledge of the Master of the ship having regard to the volume or quantity of such goods and the space which such goods were found to occupy in a conspicuous portion of the ship. 11.For all the reasons stated above, we are of the view that having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the finding recorded by the adjudicating Authority, on being satisfied that the contraband goods could not be said to have been in the ship or carried in it, without the knowledge of its Master, the non-framing of rules contemplated under Section 115(2) does not enable the applicant to plead absence of rules itself as a defence, or stand in the way in position of penalty under Section 115(2) of this Act. No costs.
............
|
