|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 41 to 60 of 172 Records
-
1980 (8) TMI 176 - ORISSA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... n struck off, that the form is not complete. As the assessee had produced forms which had complete information of the first column, merely because the other columns had not been filled up the forms produced by the assessee could not be rejected. The forms were complete ones in accordance with law. Once this view is taken, the assessee s claim for concessional rate should have been accepted. 5.. We would answer the question referred to us by saying that, on the facts of the case, the assessee had the option to furnish any one of the following informations in the D form, namely (i) Purchase order No. and date (ii) Purchase as per bill/cash memo No. and date and (iii) Supply under chalan No. and date. Therefore, in the instant case, the assessee was entitled to the benefit of the concessional rate as envisaged under section 8(1)(b) of the Central Sales Tax Act. 6.. The assessee succeeds. We would, however, make no order for costs. DAS J.-I agree. Reference answered accordingly.
-
1980 (8) TMI 174 - SUPREME COURT
Whether sales of provisions effected by the assessee in a workmen's store maintained by it are assessable to tax under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959?
Held that:- Appeal allowed. The assessee carried on business of selling provisions in the store and the sales attracted the liability to tax under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, as it existed during the year of assessment & thus restore the order of the sales tax authorities holding that the sales in question were assessable to tax under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959.
-
1980 (8) TMI 167 - SUPREME COURT
Whether there is no material in support of best judgment assessment?
Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of this case, the assessee acted in respect of the estimated purchase turnover of Rs. 3,80,000 as a dealer so as to be liable to purchase tax?
Held that:- Appeal allowed. Whether the Sales Tax Officer was justified in making a best judgment assessment under section 7(3) of the Act was not referred to the High Court, therefore, not open to the High Court to go into the question. It could not allow the new point to be raised for the first time in reference. Nor was the High Court entitled on a reference under section 11(4) of the Act to set aside the finding of the Additional Judge (Revisions) merely because on a reappraisal of the evidence it would have come to a contrary conclusion. It was also not entitled to examine whether the explanation of the assessee in regard to the deficiencies found in the account books should or should not be accepted. It may be that the sales tax authorities should have accepted the explanation of the assessee with regard to the aforesaid deficiencies, but it may as well be that there are various other deficiencies which the assessee will have still to explain.
-
1980 (8) TMI 158 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Power of Central Government to fix a limit with regard to remuneration ... ... ... ... ..... 19 of the Constitution. It is also not necessary to comment upon the validity of section 637AA of the Act. We would also rather not comment upon whether section 637A is a general section and section 637AA is a special provision. We have already observed how the two sections can be reconciled and read together as constituting the power and the manner of exercising the power conferred upon the Central Govt. The result is that the rule is made absolute to the extent that the impugned guidelines contained in the circular, Ex. A-2, along with its amendments are declared ultra vires and violative of the provisions of section 637AA of the Companies Act, 1956. We issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent not to apply the said guidelines in considering the applications moved to it. We further direct the respondent to again process and decide the applications moved on behalf of petitioners Nos. 4, 5 and 6 afresh within two months from today in accordance with the law laid down.
-
1980 (8) TMI 150 - HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Winding up - Appeals from orders ... ... ... ... ..... the decisions in Central Bank of India v . Gokal Chand, AIR 1967 SC 799, and Bant Singh v. Shanti Devi, AIR 1967 SC 1360, had held that an order which does not affect the rights and liabilities of the parties is not one which can be appealed against under section 118(1) of the Mysore Land Reforms Act. The order appealed against in the case on hand is one permitting respondent No. 1, the Canara Bank, to be impleaded as petitioner No. 2 in the winding-up petition. Merely because respondent No. 1 has been permitted to come on record as petitioner No. 2 in the winding-up petition, it does not follow that the said order has the effect of affecting any of the rights and liabilities of the appellant. That being the position, it is not possible to accede to the contention of Sri Dwaraka Nath, learned counsel for the appellant, that the impugned order of the company judge is liable to be appealed against under section 483 of the Act. Hence, this appeal is rejected as not maintainable.
-
1980 (8) TMI 149 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
Winding up - Suits stayed on winding-up order ... ... ... ... ..... ding which is pending. If the said application succeeds and the agreement is ordered to be filed in court, it is then that the case has to proceed further. The matter is yet at the preliminary stage. This argument is without any force. The provisions of section 446(3) of the Companies Act read with rule 9 of the Companies (Court) Rules have been enacted with a view to give jurisdiction to the company court to deal with all the matters concerning a company which has been ordered to be wound up. The legislative policy as enshrined in these provisions is certainly conducive for the disposal of the proceedings which concern a company which has been ordered to be wound up. No other argument has been raised to oppose the transfer of the proceedings. For the reasons recorded above, I direct that the proceedings pending before the Jammu Sc Kashmir High Court, mentioned in the petition, be transferred to this court. The file of the case may be sent for on or before 30th October, 1980.
-
1980 (8) TMI 148 - HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Winding up – Suits stayed on winding-up order ... ... ... ... ..... nd this can be done only by placing necessary facts and proving them in court. We say this because learned counsel, Sri Iyer, tried to salvage the case by reference to matters which are not on record such as the fact that the claim being that under a chitty, dates of default of payment of subscriptions would be relevant, and that investigation should be made to find the date of default so as to determine whether the claim would be barred. The relevant facts should have been mentioned in the claim and the court should have been placed in a position to appreciate the plea in that light. In the absence of any such material before us even now we feel that this argument is of no assistance in this case, but perhaps may be useful for the future as it may, perhaps, alert the official liquidator to plead and prove the claims properly. The appeal is allowed as above. The claim is dismissed as barred. Parties are directed to suffer costs in this appeal as well as in the claim petition.
-
1980 (8) TMI 128 - ITAT MADRAS-B
... ...
... ... ..... iverted to the Directors for personal need. The CIT (A) upheld this addition on finding that the interest free advance to the Director was benefit given to the Director by incurring the expenditure in taking the loan without corresponding benefit to the assessee. He upheld the addition under s. 40(c)(i) of the Act. The assessee is unable to controvert the fact that interest free loan was given to the Director and that the assessee company did not have sufficient capital of its own from which the loan could have been given. Therefore, the inference that the borrowed funds of the company have been utilised for giving interest free loan to the Director is in escapable. It follows that the expenditure incurred by the company for borrowing the funds resulted in a benefit to the Director without any corresponding benefit to the assessee. Clearly s. 40(c)(i) was attracted and we agree with the CIT (A) that the addition is sustainable. 12. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed.
-
1980 (8) TMI 125 - ITAT MADRAS-A
... ...
... ... ..... from the assessee. Apart from that if the assessee was ready with particulars upto the period 31st March, 1972 there was no reason why he would not have filed the return on that date. As it is not in dispute that reasonable cause existed for the delay upto 31st March. 1972, by reason of want of particulars the inference is that for the delay beyond that date also the same reasons will hold good. We do not find any material to show that the assessee had wilfully neglected or deliberately avoided filing the return of income. The assessee s explanation that he was prevented from filing the return because of his illness has not been found to be false though the Department had found that no evidence was forth coming. Having regard to all these and in view of the principles laid down in V.L. Dutt s case 1976 CTR (Mad) 210 103 ITR 634 (Mad), we hold that there is no justification for the levy of penalty for this year under s. 271(1)(a). 8. In the result, all the appeals are allowed.
-
1980 (8) TMI 123 - ITAT JAIPUR
... ...
... ... ..... t expenses is confirmed. On the facts of the case the disallowance cannot be sustained. 5. Lastly the assessee urges that the CIT (Appeals) erred in confirming the disallowance of Rs. 1,000 towards the travelling expenses. In this regard pages 26 and 27 of the paper book are relevant in which the details of the travelling expenses are given. The disallowance was made for personal expenses of the partners. From perusal of the details on pages 26 and 27, it appears that Shri Kushalchand partner of the assessee s firm made trips twice to Delhi. The expenditure on these two trips was incurred at Rs. 501.76 and Rs. 409.23 on 3rd Dec., 1974 and 19th May, 1975 respectively. Shri Vyas says that there is no other trip by any partner. On these facts, Shri Vyas says that disallowance of Rs. 1,000 is wholly unwarranted. We fully agree with the assessee s counsel and hold that the disallowance of Rs. 1,000 for personal expenses by the partners is not sustainable. 6. The appeal is allowed.
-
1980 (8) TMI 122 - ITAT INDORE
... ...
... ... ..... ome by the firm, there was a reasonable cause for his not filing the return till the firm filed its return. The same view has been taken by the Orissa High Court in (1976) 102 ITR 551 (Ori) (CIT vs. Baijnath Chopolia). Therefore, there was clearly a reasonable cause for the assessee rsquo s failure to file the return. Apart from this the assessee had also applied for extension of time on the same ground. Merely because the application was made two days late after the expiry of the last date for filing the return, it is no ground for not considering the same in the penalty proceedings. In the absence of any communication from the ITO, the assessee could entertain a bona fide belief that the time applied for had been allowed. But leaving that apart, it was a clear case for a reasonable cause on the ground that the firm did not intimate the share income of the assessee to him. Accordingly, we decline to interfere with the order of the AAC. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.
-
1980 (8) TMI 121 - ITAT INDORE
... ...
... ... ..... has been so verified, examine the serving officer on oath touching his proceedings and shall then declare that the summons had been duly served. In the present case, neither any affidavit was filed by the notice server and nor did the ITO record any statement on oath as required by r. 19 of order 5, CPC and nor did he declare that the service was valid by an order. In the circumstances, the requirements of r. 19 of order 5, which was imperative, were also not complied with and service by affixation in this case has to be held as invalid on that ground as well. 6. In the result, therefore, I set-aside the orders of the AAC and the ITO and restore the matter to the file of the ITO with the direction that he should reopen the assessment and reframe the same after giving full opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 7. The appeal against the order under s. 146 is allowed while the appeal against the ex-parte assessment under s. 144 shall stand allowed for statistical purposes.
-
1980 (8) TMI 120 - ITAT INDORE
... ...
... ... ..... his share income in the firm. On the basis of the share income intimated to the assessee by the firm he was under no obligation to file any further estimate of advance ndash tax under s. 212(3A) because on the basis of the current income, as intimated by the firm, the tax computed thereon did not exceed the tax demanded by more than 1/3rd of the demand. The increase came in to existence only after the assessment of the firm in which the share income of the firm was increased by applying a higher gross profit rate to the firm s income. As already stated, the is could not be anticipated by the assessee. Therefore, he was under a bona fide belief that the advance ndash tax computed on his current income would not exceed the advance ndash tax demanded by 1/3 rd of the demand. Having regard to all these facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that no penalty is exigible in this case. 6. In the result, the impugned penalty is cancelled and the appeal is allowed.
-
1980 (8) TMI 119 - ITAT HYDERABAD-A
... ...
... ... ..... nt entered into by Yugendhara Rao with other family members and there was no body of individuals much less an association of person. 9. The last ground is actually a new plea put forth by the ld. Deptl. Rep. on the strength of the latest decision of the Gujarat High Court. But on a careful reading of the judgment of the Gujarat High Court, it is found that the facts are totally different. Their Lordships found mutual agency. Their Lordships distinguished the decision in 107 ITR 91.(2) In our opinion the decision of the Gujarat High Court cannot apply to the facts of the present case. 10. Thus we hold that the share income received by Yugendhara Rao from the partner-ship firm cannot be assessed in its entirety in his hands. In other words, the assessee s claim succeeds. 11. The same result would follow in the case of other two assessees. To the extent of the shares of the divided members there cannot be any assessment in the hands of the assessees. 12. The appeals are allowed.
-
1980 (8) TMI 118 - ITAT DELHI-E
... ...
... ... ..... e that the amount should be taken as covered by the voluntary disclosure of Rs. 75,000 by the assessee under the Voluntary Disclosure Scheme as also the tangible addition of approximately Rs. 26,000 made in the last year. (Reliance was had in this regard on 86 ITR 724 and 123 ITR 467 (SC). The addition of Rs. 1,00,000 shall be deleted. 4. The only other objection in this appeal concerns the estimate of income from the two brick-kilns at Gokul and Mainpuri. The total sales were stated to be Rs. 3,79,568. The rate of 38 per cent applied obviously appears to be excessive. As held by the Tribunal in the case of the assessee family itself in respect of asst. yrs. 1971-72, 1973-74 and 1974-75 (vide order dt. 18th Dec., 1978 of Delhi Bench E of the Tribunal in ITA Nos. 293, 294 and 295 (Del) of 1977-78), we direct that the income from this source shall be computed by applying a rate of 20 per cent for this year, i.e., 1972-73, as well. 5. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed.
-
1980 (8) TMI 117 - ITAT DELHI-C
... ...
... ... ..... tal to the employment of the assessee. If the assessee did not have some income from paying clinic it may not have been possible for him to claim this deduction from his income from the paying clinic but when he is earning income from this clinic which is being treated as income from profession this sum of Rs. 505 which is directly connected with the income from profession has to be allowed as a deduction. 6. The fifth item is the sum of Rs. 300 which was claimed for attending conferences/seminars and was not financed by the employer. The allowance of this claim appears to be in order. 7. The last item is Rs. 100 which was claimed by way of stationery and this expenditure is also reasonable. I thus confirm the order of the AAC in allowing the expenditure is also reasonable. I thus confirm the order of the AAC in allowing the expenditure of Rs. 4250 and further allow the sum of Rs. 505. 8. In the result, ITA No. 2651 (Del)/1980 is dismissed and C.O.No.222(Del)/1980 is allowed.
-
1980 (8) TMI 116 - ITAT DELHI-B
... ...
... ... ..... 2. Whether there was any material before the Tribunal in coming to the conclusion that the expenses on telex overseas telephone calls, postage were covered by the sub-cls. (ii) and (vi) of cl. (b) of sub-s. (1) of Sec. 35B . Both these questions are, in fact, questions of fact. It was found as a fact by the Tribunal that the assessee had incurred expenditure on telex, telephone and postage, etc. for obtaining information regarding foreign markets, for advertisement and also for furnishing information for the promotions of services or facilities provided by the assessee. Having found these facts the Tribunal held that the assessee was entitled to weighted deduction under these sub clauses. No application of legal principles is involved. The issue are concluded by the facts found by the Tribunal. Hence no question of law fit for reference to the Hon rsquo ble High Court arises. We, therefore, dismiss the reference application. 8. In the result, the reference application fails.
-
1980 (8) TMI 115 - ITAT DELHI-B
... ...
... ... ..... t was to be fabricated the cost would have been of the order of Rs. 1,50,000. The Assessee thus made a saving and it would not be quite correct to say that the sale of the machinery at Rs. 51,500 was an arranged sale. There may be some common Directors in the assessee company and the Poona company but that by itself does not lead to the inference that out of the total sale proceeds of Rs. 5,42,000 the value of machinery of only the Drier and Spraying Unit was billed at a lower price. In the transaction between the Poona company and the assessee company the Maharashtra State Finance Corporation is also a party and when a Government institution is a party to the transaction the allegation that the sale of Drier and Spraying Unit was an arranged sale with a view to reduce the incidence of tax is not quite correct. On this point, we do not find any merit in the Revenue s appeal. 15. In the result, ITA No. 2313 (Del)/1979 is partly allowed and ITA No. 3139 (Del) 1979 is dismissed.
-
1980 (8) TMI 114 - ITAT DELHI-B
... ...
... ... ..... fferent so that a different rate of profit could be adopted. The ld. Commissioner (A) was, therefore, right in upholding the ITO s action in applying the Tribunal s decisions for the immediately preceding assessment year. We feel, however, that the additions sustained by the ld. Commissioner (A) are rather excessive. In asst. yr. 1974-75 the estimate of the turnover at Rs. 3,30,000 is rather high. We would reduce it to Rs. 3,20,000. G.P. rate was 47.15 per cent. In order to achieve 50 per cent, an addition of Rs. 8,000 should be enough. We sustain the addition to that extent. In asst. yr. 1975-76 we reduce the ITO s estimate of sale from Rs. 4,50,000 to Rs. 4,20,000, G.P. shown was 47 per cent and in order to achieve 50 per cent an addition of Rs. 13,000 should have been made. We sustain the addition to that extent. 8. No other points have been pressed. 9. In the result, ITA Nos. 1914 and 399 stand allowed for statistical purpose and the other three appeals succeed partially.
-
1980 (8) TMI 113 - ITAT DELHI-B
... ...
... ... ..... C on this point. The contention of the ld. counsel that the said loss is debitable to the P and L account and not to the sales account, in our opinion is not very relevant so far as the allowance of the said claim under s. 35 B is concerned for the simple reason that a loss or expenditure due to currency fluctuations is not covered by way of the sub-cl. of s. 35B(1)(b) of the IT Act. 11. In the appeal filed by the Department, the ground taken is that none of the expenditure allowed by the AAC is entitled to weighted deduction under s. 35B(1) of the IT Act. We are unable to accept this contention, for the reasons discussed while dealing with the appeal filed by the assessee. 12. The cross objection filed by the assessee against the appeal filed by the Department, is also infructuous and has to be dismissed. 13. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed, while the appeal filed by the Department and the cross objection filed by the assessee are dismissed.
........
|
