Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Section Wise 2009 2009 (6) This

Law	-- All -- GST Income Tax Benami Property Customs Corporate Laws Securities / SEBI Insolvency & Bankruptcy FEMA Law of Competition PMLA Service Tax Central Excise CST, VAT & Sales Tax Wealth tax Indian Laws
Court	-- Any -- Supreme Court SC Orders / Highlights High Court Appellate Tribunal Tribunal Appellate authority for Advance Ruling Advance Ruling Authority National Financial Reporting Authority Competition Commission of India ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY Commission Central Government Board DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court Commissioner / Appellate Authority Other
Citation	--Year-- 2025 2024 2023 2022 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 1990 1989 1988 1987 1986 1985 1984 1983 1982 1981 1980 1979 1978 1977 1976 1975 1974 1973 1972 1971 1970 1969 1968 1967 1966 1965 1964 1963 1962 1961 1960 1959 1958 1957 1956 1955 1954 1953 1952 1951 1950 Upto 1949 - -Volume- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 -
Landmark	Nil - N/A Referred in >= 2 Cases Referred in >= 4 Cases Referred in >= 5 Cases Referred in >= 10 Cases Referred in >= 15 Cases Referred in >= 25 Cases Referred in >= 50 Cases Referred in >= 100 Cases
Order by	TMI Citation Date of Decision

Advanced Search Options

Case Laws

Showing 381 to 400 of 686 Records

• 2009 (6) TMI 612
  

  Renewal of recognition - The assessee-trust had furnished its application in Form No. 10G on 30th June, 2008 with the Director of IT (Exemption), seeking renewal of recognition under s. 80G of the Act - renewal for recognition under s. 80G was rejected by the learned Director of IT (Exemption) - Audit report for financial year 2004-05 does not show 'the specific purpose' for accumulation - Trust deed had not undergone any change or modification from the date of its execution and as such the Director of IT (Exemption) had no evidence to cast any such allegation of existence of business activity - Hon'ble apex Court's finding in the case of Radhasoami Satsang vs. CIT (1991 -TMI - 5353 - SUPREME Court) and the decision of the Hon'ble Tribunal, Mumbai Bench 'D' in the case of Cotton Textiles Export Promotion Council vs. ITO – Accordingly it was held that the learned Director of IT (Exemption) was not justified in rejecting the application of the assessee-trust for renewal of recognition under s. 80G of the Act. The Director of IT (Exemption) is, accordingly, directed to renew the recognition under s. 80G of the Act to the assessee trust – Decided in the favour of the assessee

  ---

• 2009 (6) TMI 610
  

  Exemption u/s 11 - shares and bonds - possession on account of death of the inmates - Held that: - assessee received certain shares and bonds of small values, which statedly came into its possession on account of death of the inmates. Since there was no manifest transfer of the shares and bonds to the assessee, the same were not taken into account in the books of account. The shares were of small value and some were in odd lots which could not be disposed of immediately and, therefore, they continued to remain in possession of the assessee. Some of the securities were got transferred in the name of the assessee. That, however, does not mean that the assessee manifestly became owner of the shares. The shares and bonds belonged to the deceased intimates which normally would have gone to their legal heirs who were not traceable. This was the reason for non-entering the shares etc. in the books. The bonds and shares were also not saleable immediately.

  In these circumstances, the assessee could not be taken to be the de jure owner of the shares. Although, the word used is “held”, we are of the view that these words implies ownership of the assessee to the exclusion of all others, which is not the case here. In these circumstances, we are of the view that total denial of exemption u/s 11(1)(a) on the ground that the shares were held by the assessee will be against even the language of the provision. - Benefit of exemption allowed to assessee.

  ---

• 2009 (6) TMI 609
  

  Business income or income from house property - Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in treating the lease rent received from school building along with playground etc., as business income - Held that: - The need to remand the case to the Tribunal has occasioned because the Tribunal has failed to examine the issue involved in the appeal in the light of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Universal Plast Ltd. v. CIT (1999 -TMI - 5737 - SUPREME Court). In other words, the Tribunal did not notice the law laid down in the case of Universal Plast Ltd. v. CIT (1999 -TMI - 5737 - SUPREME Court) though applicable to the facts of the case and hence, committed an error of law in deciding the appeal.

  It is a settled principle of law that law laid down by the Supreme Court is binding on all courts/Tribunal/authority in our country by virtue of article 141 of the Constitution of India. Indeed, when the issue is settled by the decision of the Supreme Court or when any test is laid down as to how and in what manner a particular issue is required to be decided by courts then it is the foremost duty of courts/Tribunal to decide the issue in the light of test laid down by the Supreme Court. Deciding an issue in ignorance of the test vitiates the decision.

  ---

• 2009 (6) TMI 607
  

  Revision – AO allowed claim for depreciation without examining facts - assessment passed without reference to the claim and without considering the eligibility of the assessee for depreciation for items said to have been purchased and leased out in the previous year - Commissioner rightly exercised the jurisdiction under section 263 and set aside the assessment

  ---

• 2009 (6) TMI 605
  

  Exemption U/S 54EC- Assessee submitted before the Bench that the assessee-HUF sold the property by a registered sale deed.- The HUF received advances before the transfer and the money was deposited in the specified bonds as required under s. 54EC. On the basis of the same, the appellant claimed exemption under s. 54EC to the extent of value of bonds- The AO allowed the exemption in the original assessment under s. 54EC of the IT Act- But the CIT assuming jurisdiction under s. 263 held that exemption under s. 54EC was not available to the assessee as the investment in the bonds was made before the execution of the sale deed instead of within six months from the date of transfer of the property - Held that: As per the provision of s. 263, neither by the conduct of the assessee there is loss to Revenue nor the conduct of the assessee is prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue; rather the assessee was fair enough to deposit the amount immediately after receipt of the same as advance payments on the basis of the agreement to sale - Thus, the assessee succeeds in this appeal

  ---

• 2009 (6) TMI 603
  

  Search and Seizure - Addition of income – The appellant raised share capital and received share application money from seven persons aggregating to Rs. 1394.15 lakhs - From the seized material AO found that these companies have been used as a conduit for investment in the assessee company - it was explained that the amounts have been received by the assessee company only through cheques and that the names and addresses of the shareholders have been furnished - Therefore, enquires were conducted not only to lift the corporate veil of the assessee company but also that of the intermediary companies which acted as conduits - Hon'ble apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd 2008 -TMI - 76942 – Accordingly the appeal is allowed

  ---

• 2009 (6) TMI 601
  

  Genuine/ Bogus Purchases - A search operation was carried out by the Department and it was found that there are several entities which were created only to issue purchase bills where no actual supply of precious and semi-precious stones were ever made - Supreme Court of India in the case of Kachwala Gems vs. Jt. CIT (2006 -TMI - 3365 - SUPREME COURT) and Tribunal, Jaipur Bench decision in the case of Shri Shrikishan Malpani, bogus purchases was considered as a defect in the maintenance of accounts and therefore, books of account were rejected after applying the provisions of s. 145(3) of the Act - The AO applied higher GP rate of 25 per cent on declared sales of2,68,65,383 and made trading addition of60,44,714 -There is no justification for application of 25 per cent. GP rate on the total turnover of about Rs. 8.91 crores and in making an addition of Rs. 2.33 crores. In such circumstances and facts of the case, the learned CIT(A) is not justified in sustaining the complete addition of doubtful purchases. To meet both the ends of justice and to plug the leakage of revenue, we direct the AO to sustain the addition of Rs. 5 lacs. Therefore, the assessee gets the part relief

  ll the transactions were made by account payee cheque including interest payment and therefore, there can be no adverse view regarding the cash creditor. The confirmation in respect of transaction under consideration has already been submitted. - Addition can not be made

  Interest – Section 234B and 234D is mandatory and consequential in nature - Appeal is partly allowed and partly dismissed

  ---

• 2009 (6) TMI 600
  

  Income from Undisclosed Sources – valuation - books of account of the assessee were not complete - return of income filed, the assessee nowhere indicated that books of account for consideration have been maintained by him nor that the balance sheet enclosed with the return of income is shown to have been drawn from the books or account maintained - CIT(A) is, thus found to have misdirected himself in annulling the reference and thereby erred in deleting the addition - appeal of the Revenue allowed

  ---

• 2009 (6) TMI 599
  

  Release of goods - bank guarantee - assessee to furnish cash security – Held that: - furnish cash security, for all practical purposes, tantamounts to directing the assessee to make the payment of the disputed duty - duty to which the assessee has been assessed would be fully secured by furnishing of an unconditional bank guarantee - bank guarantee shall be an unconditional bank guarantee and the same shall be kept renewed - failing which it will be open to the respondents to invoke the bank guarantee - goods be released within 48 hours from the time of furnishing of the bank guarantee

  ---

• 2009 (6) TMI 598
  

  Waiver of interest on delayed payment of tax – Condition precedent section 220(2A) – Payment of interest would cause genuine hardship to assessee – Income of relevant period to be taken into account – Past liability not relevant – Finding that payment of interest would not cause financial hardship – Refusal to waive interest – Justified

  ---

• 2009 (6) TMI 597
  

  Refund – limitation – no dispute that amount not payable during relevant period – order upholding adjudication order on recovery relying on sec. 117of customs Act - retrospective amendment – recovery period within 30 days – SCN hit time-bar – order set aside

  ---

• 2009 (6) TMI 596
  

  Business Expenditure - disallowance education expenses incurred in respect of a trainee during the course of the appellant's business – Trainee was Director’s son - expenditure incurred has no nexus with the business of the appellant and the same cannot be allowed under section 37(1) of the Act – appeal dismissed

  ---

• 2009 (6) TMI 595
  
  Issues:
  1. Application to permit respondents to come on record as joint family property rights involved.
  2. Contestation of property claim by Department.
  3. Allegation of lack of diligence by proposed respondents.
  4. Liberty granted to establish right in property in appropriate proceedings.
  5. Rejection of Miscellaneous Writ No. 4823 of 2009.
  6. Rejection of writ petitions questioning property sale by Appropriate Authority.
  7. Refusal to grant relief in writ petitions based on legal contentions.
  8. Adverting to legal contentions and rejection of writ petition by single judge.
  9. Examination of Department's stand on property purchase order.
  10. Consideration of RBI's approval and property value in judgment.
  
  Analysis:
  1. An application was filed during an appeal to permit seventh and eighth respondents to come on record due to joint family property rights. The Department contested the seventh respondent's claim, citing the property sale in 1993 and vesting with the Central Government. The proposed respondents were accused of lacking diligence in defending their rights.
  
  2. The rejection of the Miscellaneous Writ No. 4823 of 2009 was based on the property being sold in 1993, preventing the court from delving into factual disputes. Liberty was granted for respondents to establish their rights in the property through appropriate legal proceedings.
  
  3. Writ petitions challenging the property sale by the Appropriate Authority were dismissed, with the single judge extensively referring to facts and previous proceedings. The single judge declined to grant relief, citing the absence of violation of natural justice and market value comparison.
  
  4. Legal contentions were raised and countered in the writ petitions, with the single judge finding no violation of natural justice. The judgment highlighted the importance of hearing both parties and making a decision based on merits.
  
  5. The Department's stand on the property purchase order was examined, focusing on comparative property sales. The single judge upheld the authority's decision on property valuation, considering factors like land area, building specifications, and market rates.
  
  6. The judgment also discussed the RBI's approval and its relevance in tax evasion prevention. The property's prime location and value were emphasized, leading to the conclusion that the property sale to the Central Government was legal and valid.
  
  7. Citing previous Supreme Court judgments, the single judge affirmed the legality of the property sale, dismissing any grievances from the agreement holder. The judgment concluded that no interference was warranted, upholding the dismissal of the writ petition.

  ---

• 2009 (6) TMI 594
  

  Abatement of duty - request for abatement is pending adjudication before the Commissioner - department raised demand for the very period for which a request for abatement is pending - Held that: - no substantial question of law - dismissal of the appeal - application for stay, also dismissed

  ---

• 2009 (6) TMI 593
  

  Fair market value - section 269UD - purchase of the property belonging to petitioners - Development agreements - constructs and give - to be provided with alternative accommodation till the said flat could be ready and given to them - Held that: - the Appropriate Authority gave conflicting and contrary findings in respect of the net apparent consideration and the fair market value to be paid by the Government. It shows non-application of mind by the Appropriate Authority in passing the impugned order. - the impugned orders passed by the Appropriate Authority under section 269UD cannot be sustained. However, in our considered opinion, it will be appropriate to remand the matter back to the Appropriate Authority for hearing the matters afresh by permitting both sides to produce addi- tional material, if any, and to take a final decision on the show-cause notices.

  ---

• 2009 (6) TMI 592
  

  Waiver of pre –deposit – valuation - Construction of Residential Complexes - Service Tax liability of the applicant on the value of the land, which has been considered by the lower authority, for arriving at the Service tax liability - identical issue was decided by this Bench vide Stay Order - prima facie case for the waiver of the pre-deposit - waiver of the pre-deposit is allowed

  ---

• 2009 (6) TMI 591
  

  Waiver of pre-deposit - Penalty - welding electrodes used for repairs and maintenance of plant and machinery - eligibility for Cenvat credit - as inputs as well as capital goods - use for lining of the jute bag and this is packing material and which is covered by definition of inputs - Held that: - eligibility of capital goods namely steel wire rope, chain and spares of cane carrier and spare of Boiler for Cenvat credit - all of them are parts of capital goods - steel wire rope is part of cane unloader and other spares are part of the cane carrier and insulating materials are part of boiler - pre-deposit of Cenvat credit demand along with interest and penalty is waived - stay petition is allowed

  ---

• 2009 (6) TMI 590
  

  Waiver of pre-deposit - Penalty - differential duty along with applicable interest - imported software along with 'Windows' software are pre-loaded on to the Hard Disk Drives of the machines manufactured and cleared - did not paid duty on the value of software - assessee itself treats loading of Windows, another procured software, as a process of manufacture and pays duty towards the value addition - Held that: - software in question is a standard one for use by all vendors to make ATMs - not customized for application by any particular bank - appellants shall pre-deposit an amount - dismissal of the appeal

  ---

• 2009 (6) TMI 589
  
  The High Court of Karnataka, with V. Gopala Gowda and Aravind Kumar, JJ., presiding, issued a judgment in 2009 (6) TMI 589. The appellant, represented by Crist Law Partners, challenged an order from the Company Law Board. The appellant argued that the Board's order was erroneous and contrary to law, as it directed the convening of an annual general meeting despite the absence of a constituted Board of Directors. The appellant contended that the meeting, which took place on 22-12-2008 and resulted in the appointment of new directors, was compliant with the Board's directive. The Company Law Board's decision was based on the Registrar of Companies' report, which indicated the absence of a Board of Directors. The court found no substantial question of law to consider and dismissed the appeal, upholding the Company Law Board's order. The judgment condoned the delay and allowed the appellant's appeal in Misc. Civil No. 1888 of 2009. The appeal was ultimately deemed devoid of merit and dismissed.

  ---

• 2009 (6) TMI 588
  

  Statement of affairs under section 454 of the Act - application filed by the official liquidator under section 454(2) of the Companies Act, 1956, to seek the statement - Held that:- Even if a person has been a director of the company at any point of time and he has ceased to be so on the relevant date, i.e., the date of winding up order or within one year prior to the relevant date, such a person can be held responsible for not submitting and verifying the statement of affairs in view of the provisions of section 454(2)(a) read with section 2(30) of the Companies Act, 1956, though he is absolved of his responsibility under section 454(1) of the Act. Therefore, it is held that the application filed under section 454(2) of the Act is maintainable.

  If the stand of the respondent is that consequent to his resignation he had nothing to do with the affairs of the company, then he ought not to have taken part in any of its proceedings post-winding up order being made by this court. On the other hand, the material furnished would make it evident that he participated in the proceeding initiated by the official liquidator subsequent to the winding up order and particularly annexure C makes clear the intention of the respondent herein to be present on June 2, 2003 and on account of the reasons mentioned therein, he could not personally be present and had therefore, sent his representative. The said letter would indicate that the respondent herein was a key person amongst the other directors of the company who were also present and that though he contended that he had no statutory duty as per section 454(1) on account of his resignation, but in view of his participation in the post-winding up proceeding which is evident from the said material, other directors not being there, the direction sought to the respondent to furnish the statement of affairs in terms of section 454(2) of the Act. Application allowed.

  ---

1 ....161718192021222324........ 35