|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 101 to 120 of 263 Records
-
1981 (9) TMI 166 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... e Commissioner referred to various authorities in his order, he has clearly overlooked the ratio of the Hon ble Punjab and Haryana High Court judgement in case of CIT Amritsar vs. Mothoo Ram Prem Chand (1980) 14 CTR (P and H) 110 (1980) 121 ITR 59 (P and H) where the Hon ble High Court has clearly observed that the IT authorities cannot refuse to register a firm if the application is made in accordance with the provision of ss. 184 and 185 r/w rr. 22 to 25 merely on the ground that the profits of the firm had not been divided by the partners. The Hon ble Court has further pointed out that the division of the profits does not fall within the purview of the said section. The main fact that is to be taken into consideration is that the partnership is a genuine one and evidenced by an instrument. This is a case before us and we are of the opinion that the Commissioner erred in cancelling the order of ITO. We set aside his order and restore the status quo ante. 6. Appeal allowed.
-
1981 (9) TMI 165 - ITAT CALCUTTA-E
... ...
... ... ..... ana High Courts, we uphold the impugned order of the CIT (Appeals) challenged in these appeals by the revenue. 9. The decision of the Calcutta High Court in case of Choloride India Ltd. is distinguishable. Firstly, this decision was rendered with reference to the expression regular assessment in s. 2(40) of the Act in the context that the said expression includes assessment made by the ITO pursuant to the direction of the AAC on appeal. Further this decision was rendered with reference to the assessment made by ITO pursuant to the direction of the AAC on appeal and not on assessment or re assessment under s. 147 (a) of the Act. These two factors distinguish this decision. 10. As far as the other decision relied upon by the Deptl. Rep. in P.A. Abdul Muthalif Rowther is concerned, that is in the matter of levy of interest under ss. 139 and 217 and not with reference to s. 273(b) as involved over here. 11. In the result, the appeals by the Revenue fail and are hereby dismissed.
-
1981 (9) TMI 164 - ITAT CALCUTTA-E
... ...
... ... ..... n by him in partnership was not liable to be included in his total income under s. 22 of the Act. 10. The facts in the present case are similar to that before the Gujarat High Court in the case of Rasiklal Balabhai. Applying the ratio of the said decision in these facts we hold that the annual letting value of the aforesaid immovable property owned by the assessee to the extent of 1/4th and used for the business carried on by him in partnership where his share in the partnership was to the extent of 1/4th in the profits and losses of the firm was not liable to be included in its total income under s. 22 of the Act. The finding being as stated hereinbefore, we further hold that the second condition laid down in s. 147(a)/147(b) of the Act that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment or has been under assessed for each of the years under consideration is also not satisfied in the present case. 11. In the result, the appeals by the revenue fail and are hereby dismissed.
-
1981 (9) TMI 163 - ITAT CALCUTTA-E
Payment Not Deductible ... ... ... ... ..... finition of salary is wide enough to include dearness allowance. On the other hand, definition of salary contained in Explanation 1 to rule 3, which has been relied upon by the learned departmental representative, has absolutely no application for the purpose of section 40A(5). The definition in the aforesaid Explanation I has been given only for the purpose of rule 3, namely, for valuation of the perquisite by way of rentfree residential accommodation provided by an employer to the employee. This definition has clearly no relevance to the provisions of section 40A(5). We, therefore, hold that there is no merit in the departmental appeal on this point and that the Commissioner (Appeals) was justified in directing the ITO to include dearness allowance as a part of salary for the purpose of section 40A(5). 6. to 9. Paras 6 to 9 are not reproduced here as they decide the issues following earlier decisions of the Tribunal . 10. In the result, the departmental appeal is dismissed.
-
1981 (9) TMI 162 - ITAT CALCUTTA-C
Capital Asset, Personal Effects ... ... ... ... ..... on were articles of personal effects and, hence, sale of those articles did not attract the provisions of section 45 of the Act. 7. Coming to the alternative submission of the learned counsel for the assessee as to the value of the paintings at the time of acquisition or as on 1-1-1954, we find that there is no material on record to show that the acquisition value of the paintings was Rs. 50,000. The ITO has not given any comparable case to show the extent of increase in the value of paintings. In view of these facts, we are of the opinion that the ITO had no basis for determining the acquisition value of the paintings sold by the assessee at Rs. 50,000. 8. Having regard to the totality of the circumstances, we hold that the lower authorities were not justified in holding that the sale of the paintings attracted capital gains. The case relied on by the learned departmental representative does not apply to the facts of the present case. 9. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1981 (9) TMI 161 - ITAT CALCUTTA-C
Assessment, Reopening Of Summary Assessment ... ... ... ... ..... s under section 143(2)(b) are not tenable. 7. None of the decisions cited by the learned counsel for the assessee is a direct authority on the point at issue and they are distinguishable on facts. Hence, we consider it unnecessary to discuss them. 8. Coming to the merit of the case, we see that all along in the past, under similar circumstances, the net profit rate of 13 per cent was applied in determining the assessable income of the assessee. We are unable to accept the submissions of the learned counsel for the assessee that due to time lag between the time of submission of a tender and completion of work there was an increase in the price of raw materials which resulted in less profit. This feature is not uncommon in the line of business carried on by the assessee. Hence, this contention has got no merit. We, therefore, hold that the rate of profit at 13 per cent as applied by the lower authorities, was just and proper. 9. In the result, the appeal fails and is dismissed.
-
1981 (9) TMI 160 - ITAT CALCUTTA-B
Method Of Accounting, Year In Which Liability/Expenditure Deductible ... ... ... ... ..... h that liability could not be enforced till the quantification was effected consequent to the awards by the Commissioner under section 19 of the 1923 Act, irrespective of the fact that the assessee in the proceedings before the Commissioner was contesting its liability towards its said workmen-employees, that liability did not cease to be a liability, because the assessee was contesting those proceedings before the Commissioner. We, therefore, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on the above discussions, hold that the liability of the assessee, in respect of the aforesaid amount of Rs. 7,56,236 had accrued against the assessee in the year under consideration, pursuant to the claims made by the workmen against it before the Commissioner under the 1923 Act. 15. In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed. 16. S.P.A. No. 12 (Cal.) of 1981 --- In view of our above decision, the stay petition by the assessee has become infructuous and is hereby rejected.
-
1981 (9) TMI 159 - ITAT CALCUTTA-B
Deduction Of Tax At Source, Consequence Of Failure To Deduct ... ... ... ... ..... ank becomes their agent. The bank is liable to be assessed as an agent of the non-residents and as such, applicability of section 195 to the assessee-bank is ruled out. 3. Section 195 states that any person responsible for paying interest for a non-resident has to deduct tax thereon unless he is himself liable to pay tax as an agent. Thus, if the payer is not liable to deduct tax from the interest paid to the non-resident, since the payer is to be treated as an agent, the question arises as to who is to deduct tax under section 195 since every person paying interest to the non-resident automatically becomes the agent of the non-resident. Section 195 will be rendered otiose and unworkable. Since the section has to be interpreted in a manner that is workable, we have to hold that the provisions of section 195 with regard to the agents of non-residents would apply only to such persons who have actually been declared as agents by the ITO after issuing notice under section 163(2).
-
1981 (9) TMI 158 - ITAT CALCUTTA
... ...
... ... ..... elonged to HUF though its income is assessable in the status of individual in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Sujit Lal Chabda (1975) 101 ITR 776 (SC). That being the position, it has to be held that there was a reasonable cause for delay in filing the Wealth-tax returns by the assessee. 7. Moreover, the facts of the case clearly go to indicate that the WTO had not applied his mind while proceeding to pass penalty orders. The AAC also does not appear to have carefully considered the assessee s explanation stating reasons for delayed submission of the Returns. Taking into consideration the entirety of the circumstances, we are of the opinion that there was a reasonable cause for delay in filing the WT Returns by the assessee and that the penalties were levied without consideration of the assessee s explanation. Accordingly, we cancel the penalty order passed by the WTO for all the years under appeal, 8. In the result, the Cross Objections are allowed.
-
1981 (9) TMI 157 - ITAT BOMBAY-E
Payments Not Deductible ... ... ... ... ..... s. Unless they are the producers, the assessee would not be entitled to the benefit of the rule. It may be that these two persons were merely dealers in frog legs. They might have purchased it from other primary producers. This fact has to be looked into. For this purpose, we would restore the appeal to the register of the Commissioner (Appeals). He would examine whether the two parties from whom frog legs were purchased could be treated as producers of such articles or whether they were buying them from others and in turn selling them to the assessee. We do not find any merit in the objection raised by the assessee that this point should not be allowed to be raised by the department. It is very necessary for a proper disposal of the point at issue before us. 11. For statistical purposes, the appeal is partly allowed. The Commissioner (Appeals) would examine the facts with reference to these two parties and decide whether they are merely dealers or whether they are producers.
-
1981 (9) TMI 156 - ITAT BOMBAY-D
Property Passing On Death, Aggregation Of Property ... ... ... ... ..... ssessed as separate estates, without either of them being aggregated to the other properties and without adding them together to form a single separate estate. 12. The only other ground in the departmental appeal states that the Appellate Controller erred in holding that the premium of Rs. 7,614 paid under the Married Women s Property Policy Act by the deceased within the statutory period of two years from his death should not be treated as dutiable. We find that the decision of the Appellate Controller is supported by the several Tribunal decisions, namely, ED Appeal No. 33/Ahd./1977-78. ED Appeal No. 17/B/1975-76 and ED Appeal No. 9/Bom./1980. In each of these cases, the Tribunal has held that the premiums of the type under consideration cannot be treated as gifts made by the deceased during his life time. Respectfully following the aforesaid decisions, we uphold the decisions of the Appellate Controller on this point. 13. In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed.
-
1981 (9) TMI 155 - ITAT BOMBAY-B
... ...
... ... ..... t is that the profits and reserves as on 31st Dec., 1975 were about Rs. 7,00,000. Though this is true, it is also noticeable that the company has been consistently making additions to its fixed assets, i.e. it did so in the preceding years, in the year under consideration and in the following years as well. 8. It is well settled that in considering a matter of this kind, the smallness or extent of the profits has to be looked at from the point of view of the Directors who are businessmen and the needs of the company from all angles, including the demands for financial resources for the purpose of its expansion or diversification programme. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case of the assessee, we hold that, having regard to the available profits as on 26th June, 1976, it was not reasonable to expect the assessee to declare any dividend for the year 1975. Therefore, we direct that the order under s. 104 is cancelled. 9. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1981 (9) TMI 154 - ITAT BOMBAY-B
... ...
... ... ..... artment authorities. In view of this principle and for the reasons stated above, we hold that the assessee was entitled to the DIT relief for the three years under consideration. In this view of the matter, we do not consider it necessary to deal with certain in other arguments which were advanced on behalf of the two sides referring to the decisions reported at 24 ITR 405 (SC) and 13 ITR 731. We may add that the Ahmedabad Bench B of the Tribunal has, by their order dt. 24th June, 1980 held in the case of Shri Jayantilal Keshavlal Patel, one of the other partners of the same firm, that he is entitled to relief under s. 91 in similar circumstances, though the debate proceeded in that case on somewhat different lines. 11. In view of our finds as recorded above, we direct that the orders of the CIT passed under s. 263 are set aside which means that the corresponding orders passed under s. 91 will be restored, 12. In the result, the assessee succeeds and the appeals are allowed.
-
1981 (9) TMI 153 - ITAT BOMBAY-B
... ...
... ... ..... fresh in accordance with the law. We direct accordingly. 9. The only other point raised in the Deptl. appeal is as below On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the CIT(A) erred in deleting Rs. 8,251 being expenditure incurred on entertainment and was accordingly disallowed by the ITO under s. 37(2B) of the IT Act, 1961 . The deduction was claimed under the head sales promotion expenses . The ITO had held that the expenditure was hit by the provisions of s. 37(2B). The CIT(A) had held otherwise on the principle that unless the expenditure in question was lavish, it would not be hit by the said provisions. We are in agreement with his approach. We have looked into the particulars of the expenditure involved. Suffice it to state that we do not find that any part of the expenditure was on a lavish scale. We hold that whole of it is allowable as a deduction. 10. In the result, the assessee s appeal is partly allowed and the Deptl. appeal is deemed to be partly allowed.
-
1981 (9) TMI 152 - ITAT BOMBAY-A
... ...
... ... ..... oses the cost of an asset to a divided member must necessarily be its cost to him at the time of partition. We are of opinion that this principle is clearly applicable not only in the case of partition of a joint family but also in the case of dissolution of a firm. In both, the rights and liabilities of the members of the association are being determined. In this case, the enhanced value of the asset taken by one partner has been the basis for determining the rights of the retiring partners. There is no case that the value placed by the approved valuer was inflated. Although the ITO suggests fraud, in the sense that the partners are also directors of the limited company, no other material has been brought out to show that there had been collusion. Merely because they were directors in the assessee firm, it cannot be inferred that there was collusion. We would, therefore, hold that the CIT (A) was right in his findings. 6. In the result, the departmental appeal is dismissed.
-
1981 (9) TMI 151 - ITAT BOMBAY-A
... ...
... ... ..... . The subsequent letter is only a confirmation of the position and it cannot be treated as entirely a new piece of evidence. The copies of the letters have been produced before us. The second letter dt. 7th Aug., 1974 only says that the mention in the earlier letter of a cheque being sent for Rs. 65,000 is a mistake and that no amounts are due to the assessee over and above Rs. 55,000 for which a cheque has been sent. The earlier letter will also show that there has been a settlement of the case. But no particulars are forthcoming with regard to the nature of the dispute between the parties and the nature of the settlement. Without full particulars relating to the transaction, it will not be possible to take a decision as to whether the amount of Rs. 10,000 can be treated as a business loss. The claim cannot be allowed on the materials now available on the record. This ground is, therefore, decided in favour of the Department. 8. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part.
-
1981 (9) TMI 150 - ITAT BOMBAY-A
Firm, Registration, Genuineness Of Firm ... ... ... ... ..... left entirely in the hands of Shri Mahesh D. Shah. Similarly, the partners would not have been so meticulous about the financial transactions as no strangers have been associated with the partnership. It will not, therefore, be proper to come to the conclusion that the firm is not genuine merely on the basis of the inadequate knowledge of the other partners about the working of the firm. It is settled law that a mere suspicion could not be sufficient to justify the inference of the fact that the partnership is not genuine. The position would have been different if there were reliable materials to show that the remaining partners were mere benamidars for Shri Mahesh D. Shah. As already pointed out there are no materials justifying such an inference. Thus, on a consideration of the evidence and circumstances, we find that the ITO was not justified in holding that the partnership is not genuine and in refusing registration to the same. 8. In the result, the appeals are allowed.
-
1981 (9) TMI 149 - ITAT BANGALORE
Female Member ... ... ... ... ..... erty, be it her absolute property or limited estate, in the joint family stock. 6. The ratio laid down in the above cases squarely apply to the instant case. The decision of the Madras High Court in the case of Nattuswamy v. GTO 1973 91 ITR 142 relied on by the assessee s counsel has no application to the facts of the instant case. That case was a case where there was a settlement in favour of the assessee s sons, whereas in the instant case, the assessee is the sole coparcener and so he had absolute rights to deal with the properties. The wife and minor daughters of the assessee have no right to claim partition. The assessee, being the sole coparcener, had absolute rights in the HUF properties. Thus, the properties given to the wife and minor daughters of the assessee are only given by way of gift. Thus, we agree with the view of the lower authorities. 7. to 10. These paras are not reproduced here as they involve minor issues. 11. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed.
-
1981 (9) TMI 148 - ITAT ALLAHABAD-B
... ...
... ... ..... en the Deptl. Valuer conceded this position and the only reason given by the ld. AAC for enhancing the value of the property by aforesaid figure has been that there is no provision in the IT Act for allowing such a deduction. The aforesaid reasoning is, in our opinion, not correct, for it is not the determination of taxable income which is being worked out in the present case. What is being worked out in the present case is the yield from the property which an intending buyer can reasonably expect from the property under consideration. While estimating the said yield, an intending buyer would take into account the above expenditure. The ld. Deptl. Valuer was, therefore, correct in deducting the aforesaid expenditure while working out the valuation of the property. Subject to the above remarks, the WTO will re-determine the value of the property and give the necessary relief to the assessee. 14. For statistical purposes, we will treat the assessee s appeals as partly allowed.
-
1981 (9) TMI 147 - ITAT ALLAHABAD-A
... ...
... ... ..... Under these circumstances, we fail to appreciate how the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in Ogale Glass Work s could be of any help to the assessee trust. On the contrary, it is not disputed and cannot be disputed that the said three charitable institutions had acknowledged the receipt of the share certificates only after the relevant valuation date as mentioned in para 2(e) above. We are of the view that the value of the shares donated to these three charitable institutions was includible in the net wealth of the assessee. We would, therefore, direct the WTO not to include the value of the shares donated to Georgina MacRobert Memorial Hospital in the net wealth of the assessee trust. However, the WTO was fully justified in including the value of the shares donated to the other three charitable institutions in the net wealth of the assessee. To that extent, therefore, we would set aside the order of the AAC and restore that of the WTO. 9. The appeal is partly allowed.
............
|
