|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 81 to 100 of 217 Records
-
1980 (2) TMI 140 - ITAT MADRAS-A
... ...
... ... ..... firm to Shri Ranganathan. We confirm the order of the AAC deleting the inclusion off the amount of Rs. 18,000. The Appeal is dismissed. I am in complete agreement with the reasonings found in the above order of the Appellate Tribunal and they squarely apply to this case. In the instant case, it is admitted that the assessee s husband Shri Narayan had rich experience in the textile field. He had worked as a senior executive of Indian Casablancas Pvt. Ltd., Bombay, for nearly 24 years as borne out by the certificates issued by the said company. The remuneration paid to him was solely attributable to the application of such technical qualification, knowledge and experience. I, therefore, hold that the proviso to s. 64(1)(ii) of the Act would apply to this case and the amounts added are not liable to be included in computing the assessee s total income under s. 64(1)(ii) of the Act for both the years under appeal. I accordingly delete the above additions. The appeals are allowed.
-
1980 (2) TMI 139 - ITAT MADRAS-A
... ...
... ... ..... chest pain. The AAC, however, referred to certain other matters with reference to payment of advance-tax, etc. and held that there was no reasonable cause for the delay and he confirmed the penalty. The assessee has come on appeal before me against the order of the AAC. 3. I heard the parties. It is common ground that Sri V.V. Nagarajan to whom notice was issued to show-cause why penalty could not be imposed died before offering his explanation. His widow could not possibly explain the reasons for the delay of Sri Nagarajan in filing the return in time. However, she explained that Sri Nagarajan was suffering from abnormal functioning of heart during the relevant period as a result of which he also died subsequently on 26th June, 1977. In these circumstances I am of the view that it cannot be said that there was no reasonable cause for Sri Nagarajan, V.V. in his failure to file the return of income within time. I, therefore, cancel the penalty levied. 4. The appeal is allowed.
-
1980 (2) TMI 136 - ITAT MADRAS
... ...
... ... ..... ute arose out of the immovable properties situate in Malaysia. According to article 6 of the above agreement reported in 107 ITR (Statutes) 36 and 40, the income from such property may be taxed in the contracting state in which the property is situate. The ld. Deptl. Rep. submitted that unless the assessee produces a certificate to show that the above property income was taxed in Malaysia, the assessee may not be entitled to relief as per article 22. I am unable to agree with this submission. Under article 6, the Malaysian Govt. is empowered to tax the income from immovable property on the ground that the property is situate there. I am unable to see how the word may occurring in article 6 would alter the legal position. I am of the view that order of the Tribunal referred to above applies to this case. Following the same order, I hold that the income arising from immovable properties in Malaysia should be excluded from the total income of the assessee. The appeal is allowed.
-
1980 (2) TMI 134 - ITAT JAIPUR
... ...
... ... ..... The ld. counsel for the assessee supported the order of the AAC. 7. In our opinion, the finding of the AAC is quite correct. From the facts found by the AAC it is proved that the transactions of purchase and sale of the goods in question were carried on by Shri Shivnarain, father of the minor Shri Laxmi Narain, on his behalf. A guardian is always competent to contract on behalf of his minor son. This fact is also proved from the statement of Shri Laxmi Narain. The profit earned by Shri Laxmi Narain was also enjoyed by him. On behalf of the Revenue, no material worth the name was placed on record to establish that really the transactions were undertaken by the firm and profits in question were enjoyed by the firm. In absence of any such material, and in view of the aforesaid discussion, the profit of Rs. 6,053 cannot be added in the hands of the firm. So the learned AAC was quite correct in deleting the addition. 8. In the result the appeal fails and the same stands rejected.
-
1980 (2) TMI 133 - ITAT JAIPUR
... ...
... ... ..... stance the notice or the proceeding is in conformity with or according to intent and purpose of the Act. In the present case it cannot be said that a mere omission contemplated in s. 292B had occurred. As stated, penalty is to be levied on the basis of a charge which has to be specified to the assessee. If the show cause notice had made it clear that it was for the failure of the assessee to file the estimate of advance-tax and s. 273(a) had been wrongly written instead of s. 273(b), the argument of the learned Deptl. Representative would have been tenable. The penalty notice, however, was not only stated to be under s. 273(a) but the body also indicated that it was for filing of incorrect estimate with knowledge and intent. Obviously penalty on the basis of a different charge could not be imposed. 9. We hold that the levy of the penalty was not proper and the learned AAC was right in cancelling the same. We uphold the order of learned AAC. 10. In the result the appeal fails.
-
1980 (2) TMI 132 - ITAT JAIPUR
... ...
... ... ..... . The position thus is that Smt. Prabha Agarwal, according to the statements of all the partners, joined the firm in her own right as a financing partner and she did provide her own capital of Rs. 10,000. She exercised full control over this amount. She also exercised full control over the profit earned by her. There is no material on the record to show that the position was otherwise. This being the position, we are unable to uphold the view taken by the authorities below that the lady was benamidar of Sri Maheshchand Agarwal. As stated, the material on the record does not justify such a conclusion. We are unable, therefore, to uphold the refusal of registration to the assessee firm by the authorities below. We cancel the orders of the learned ITO and that of the learned AAC and direct that the firm be treated as a genuine firm and registration be granted for this assessment year. 9. This disposes of the assessee s stay application also 10. In the result the appeal succeeds.
-
1980 (2) TMI 131 - ITAT JAIPUR
... ...
... ... ..... ITO. 8. It has been urged that the assessee itself agreed to pay a fine of Rs. 3,000 so that the excess stock in its possession may not be seized. The ld. counsel for the assessee has explained that it was done only to avoid any damage to the business which would have accrued if the goods had been seized. It is a quite plausible explanation. The fine was later on cancelled by the authorities on the ground that s. 22(6) of the Rajasthan Sales tax Act could not apply since no inventory of the stock had been made and, therefore, there was nothing to show that the assessee had in its possession excess stock not recorded in the books of account. 9. We entirely agree with the ld AAC, that the material with the ITO could not be a proper basis for the conclusion that investment to the extent of Rs. 13,575 had been made by the assessee in the relevant previous year outside the books of account. The deletion was justified. We uphold the AAC s order. 10. In the result the appeal fails.
-
1980 (2) TMI 130 - ITAT JAIPUR
... ...
... ... ..... clubbed under s. 64 of the Act, in the assessment of the HUF. This point was directly in issue before Their Lordship of the Supreme Court in the cases referred to above. In the aforesaid cases, it was held that s. 64(1)(ii) of the Act, only talks of an individual . In the said decisions, it was also held that if the father of the minor son is a representative he is not an individual person. It is just by chance that he happens to be the very individual, whose spouse is also a partner in the same firm, or whose minor son has been admitted to the benefits of this partnership firm, but, the word individual occurring in s. 64(1)(ii) of the Act must be given the meaning in a restricted sense. Other decision also lay down the same view. 8. In view of the aforesaid facts, and the law laid down in the aforesaid cases. I am fully satisfied that the finding of the ld. AAC is quite correct, and no interference is called for. 9. In the result, the appeal fails and the same is dismissed.
-
1980 (2) TMI 129 - ITAT JAIPUR
... ...
... ... ..... at the ITO had committed irregularity. It is also possible that the return of income was not on the record when the notice was issued. Taking an over-all view, we are inclined to hold that the return of income was filed on 14th Aug., 1973 and there was thus no default on the assessee s part for which penalty under s. 271(1)(a) could be levied. Our attention has also been drawn to the fact that due to the serious sickness of partner Shri Kanmal which lasted during 1968 to 1970, the books of the accounts of the assessee firm had been closed from year to year rather late and taking this as a reasonable cause the penalties under s. 271(1)(a) imposed for the earlier years had been deleted by the Tribunal. If at all any default was there, it has been urged, the same could be considered as being for reasonable cause for this assessment year also. We feel that the levy of penalty in the present case was not justified. Hence we cancel the penalty. 6. In the result the appeal succeeds.
-
1980 (2) TMI 128 - ITAT JAIPUR
... ...
... ... ..... would be passed. We may also point out that there is specific provision in the IT Act for cancelling registration granted by the ITO under s. 185 of the Act. The learned ITO did not invoke s. 186(1) of the Act. It means that the Department accepted that a genuine firm was in existence in the year of account. Registration was granted to the firm in the immediately preceding year. The application in form No. 12 was within time. Under these circumstances, the learned ITO was under obligation to grant continuation of registration to the firm for the first period. 12. Looking to the aforesaid facts and the entirety of circumstances, in our opinion, on the point in controversy conceivably there could be two opinions. So the authorities below were not correct in invoking the provisions of s. 187(1) of the Act. So the application under s. 154 of the Act does not lie in the present case. Accordingly, the order of the learned CIT is cancelled. 13. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1980 (2) TMI 127 - ITAT JABALPUR
... ...
... ... ..... nt death of assessee rsquo s wife, and (2) the employee Shri N.P. Nema who was looking after his Income-tax and Wealth-tax affairs, suddenly left the service in 1974. The learned counsel of the assessee also submitted that the returns for the earlier years and in subsequent years were filed by the assessee in time. It was only in respect of these two years that there was delay on the part of the assessee in submitting the returns of net wealth and the said delay secured on account of the reasons fully explained before the authorities below. After presuming the assessee rsquo s explanation submitted before the WTO, we are of the opinion that the delay in the submission of the returns of net wealth for these two years is covered by a reasonable cause and, accordingly, the AAC was quite justified in cancelling the penalties imposed by the WTO under s. 18(1)(a) of the WT Act in respect of these two years under appeal. 5. In the result, both the departmental appeals are dismissed.
-
1980 (2) TMI 126 - ITAT JABALPUR
... ...
... ... ..... nue to the assessee for the year under appeal. The advance tax of Rs. 2,320, therefore, cannot be said to have been paid against the notice issued by the Department. The advance tax of Rs. 2,320, therefore, could have been paid only against the estimate under s. 212(3). Further, the ITO had also treated this amount as advance tax. Unfortunately the CIT s order passed under s. 263 is silent regarding the advance tax amounting to Rs. 2,320 paid by the assessee on 29th Dec., 1973. It might be that these facts had either escaped the notice of the CIT or the same was not put up before him. Therefore, we hold that the amount adjusted by the ITO as advance tax was paid under s. 212(3) of the IT Act, 1961 and there was no liability against the assessee under s. 217 of the IT Act. In view of these facts we hold that the action under s. 263 was not warranted in the case of the assessee. The order of the CIT under s. 263 is, therefore, cancelled. 6. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1980 (2) TMI 125 - ITAT JABALPUR
... ...
... ... ..... Madras High Courts which are in favour of the assessee rsquo s contentions have been followed by the Tribunal. We may point out that the decision in Nandlal Sohanlal rsquo s case (6), is based on the Full Bench decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Vishakha Flour Mill rsquo s case (11), which has since been over ruled by a larger Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Vinayaka Cinema (10), following the dictum laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Vegetable Products Ltd.(14), we would follow the decisions which are in favour of the assessee, without meaning any disrespect to the other decisions cited on behalf of the Revenue. Accordingly, we hold that the CIT was not justified in his conclusion that the two separate assessment orders passed by the ITO were erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of revenue. Accordingly, we vacate his orders and restore the two separate assessment orders passed by the ITO. In the result the appeals are allowed.
-
1980 (2) TMI 124 - ITAT INDORE
... ...
... ... ..... o entertainment tax which was actually spent as and when it was received from the customers and, therefore, the investment on money-lending, cannot be separated so exactly. 4. The last point relates to income from house property. It has been argued that the same tenant continued to occupy the property and there was no scope for increase in the same. The ITO has also not given any reason for estimating higher rental value. It is a matter of common knowledge that the rent of a tenant cannot ordinarily be increased. The income from house property returned and accepted in the next year is Rs. 4,715 which includes the entire income from the house secured by the assessee, after the death of his father. This year the estimate has been put at Rs. 6,000. There is no reason to put a higher estimate this year. We, therefore, delete the addition in the house property and hold that the originally returned figures should be accepted. 5. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed as above.
-
1980 (2) TMI 123 - ITAT INDORE
... ...
... ... ..... ent of Rs. 5,000. In these circumstances, we clear that the onus which was cast on the assessee in terms of the Explanation to s. 271(1)(c) has been duly discharged. After the submission of the assessee s explanation, the onus has once again shifted to the Department to conclusively prove that the amount added towards the total income in fact represented the conceal income view of the ratio of the decisions of the Supreme Court reported in 76 ITR 696 and 83 ITR 369. No material has, however, been brought on the record by the Department to establish that the sum of Rs. 9,500 which was added on account of unexplained deposits in the bank account represented the assessee taxable income, which was concealed. In these circumstances, no penalty under s. 271(1)(c) of the act, 1961, r/w the Explanation thereto is leviable on the assessee. Accordingly, we cancel the penalty of Rs.9,500 imposed by the IAC under s. 271 (1)(c) of the IT Act, 1961. 9. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1980 (2) TMI 122 - ITAT INDORE
... ...
... ... ..... the income before it accrues or arises to him. Effectiveness of the device depends not upon considerations of morality, taxing statues may not, except on peril of penalty, be violated, but it may lawfully be circumvented. Considering the fact that the income from property and interest was separately shown in the names of the two ladies and it has also been assessed as such by the IT Department and the assessee s explanation with regard to the transfer of the said property in the names of the two ladies has not been accepted in the course of the quantum proceedings, it cannot be said that the assessee concealed particulars of income to the extent of additions made in his own hands. Relying on the various Judgments of the Supreme Court as discussed above, I am of the opinion that penalty under s. 271(1)(c) of the IT Act is not leviable on the assessee. Accordingly, I cancel the penalty of Rs. 18,335 under s. 271(1)(c) upheld by the AAC. 10. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1980 (2) TMI 121 - ITAT INDORE
... ...
... ... ..... Karnail Singh V. Kaleran (3). This authority was actually cited before the AAC who was of the opinion that the explanation of the assessee was proved to be false to his knowledge. We differ with this view of the AAC and would say that the explanation is unacceptable because the lady did not disclose this money in her own disclosure under the voluntary disclosure scheme but this fact does not necessarily lead to the conclusion that the explanation was false to the knowledge of the assessee. It may be that the lady omitted to mention this amount and for that if any body is responsible, it is Smt. Tulsibai. The fact remains that she swore in an affidavit in the assessment proceedings themselves that this money belonged to her and our discussion above shows that it is not wholly impossible. We are, therefore, of the opinion that it would not be safe to maintain any penalty upon the assessee in the circumstances of the case. We accordingly accept the appeal and cancel the penalty.
-
1980 (2) TMI 120 - ITAT HYDERABAD-A
... ...
... ... ..... ld not justify the imposition of penalty. In our view the onus which is on Department to prove that the assessee has concealed the income or furnished inaccurate particulars of income has not been discharged by the Department. The ratio laid down by the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Addl. CIT vs. Burugupalli China Krishnamurthy and Others and the ration of the Supreme Court in the case of Anwar Ali (76 ITR 696) and that of CIT vs. Khoday Eswarasa and Sons (83 ITR 369) squarely apply to the facts of the instant case. Applying the ratio laid down in the above cases we hold that the Department has not discharged the onus of proving that the assessee has concealed the income or furnished inaccurate particulars of income so as to attract the provisions of s. 271(1)(c). Thus the penalty levied under s. 271(1)(c) cannot be sustained. Accordingly we cancel the penalty order levying penalty of Rs. 1,08,550 under s. 271(1)(c) of the IT Act, 1961. 4. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1980 (2) TMI 119 - ITAT DELHI-B
... ...
... ... ..... d not effect the application of this proviso. On the other hand, it was argued by Shri C.S. Aggarwal, Advocate for the assessee, that the proviso could not be applicable to the facts of this case. In our opinion, this proviso cannot be applied for two reasons. Firstly, there seemed to be no material before the ITO to conclude that the Company s car was available to the assessee for use otherwise than exclusively for the employer s business. Secondly, since the car was not provided to the assessee by both of his employers he could not be denied standard deduction in full by only considering the employer, who had not provided any car to the assessee for the performance of his duties. We are, therefore, inclined to take the view that the assessee was entitled to claim the full standard deduction of Rs. 3,500 under s. 16(i). 8. In the result, ITA Nos. 2635 and 2636 filed by the Department fail and are dismissed whereas the assessee s appeal (ITA No. 2651) succeeds and is allowed.
-
1980 (2) TMI 118 - ITAT DELHI-A
... ...
... ... ..... rned counsel for the assessee, on the other hand, has invited our attention to the fact that, in the immediately following year, the ITO has accepted almost the same rate of gross profits as was shown by the assessee, this year. He has also justified the lower rate shown this year on the ground that the assessee s turnover of Rs. 18,84,269 this year was much larger than the turnover of Rs. 10,14,987 in the immediately preceding year. He has also urged that the trading results shown by the assessee firm have been accepted in the past as also in later years. 9. We find the AAC has given sound and valid reasons for deleting the addition of Rs. 40,000. The aforesaid arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the assessee also have considerable merit. On a consideration thereof, we are satisfied that the AAC was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 40,000 made by the ITO and on this point also his order is confirmed. 10. In the result, the Departmental appeal is dismissed.
........
|
