|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 121 to 140 of 232 Records
-
1986 (4) TMI 113 - ITAT DELHI-D
Firm, Registration ... ... ... ... ..... ition of only Rs. 5,000 came to be made on agreed basis. Therefore, taking an overall picture of the case I have do hesitation in the deed and the formalities as stipulated under the Act having been completed, its claim for restoration under section 185(1) (a) wrongly came to be rejected on mere technicalities. As far as the ITO s approach that there was no reasonable cause for not filing the original partnership deed with the registration application is held to be not justified because of his own observation that the original deed was furnished during the course of assessment proceeding and that a certified copy had been filed along with the application. 15. Therefore, holding that allocation of one third share to each of the three partners was in accordance with the deed and the surrounding circumstances, I reverse the orders of the authorities below and direct the ITO to accord benefit of registration in terms of section 185(1) (a). 16. In the result the appeal is allowed.
-
1986 (4) TMI 112 - ITAT DELHI-C
... ...
... ... ..... ard. However, in the absence of any finding on the system being regularly followed by the assessee, we consider that the ITO should ascertain the facts of at least for six years to find out whether the claim of the assessee regarding following the last in first out system was born out, then the results shown cannot be disturbed unless the ITO gives a basis for coming to the conclusion that the true profits cannot be deduced. In case the assessee fails to show the regular system, then the proper course can be to value the closing stock on the basis of the average rate of the opening stock and the purchases unless there are specific facts before him that some specific item purchased at a specific time at a specific rate are indicated in the closing stock. With these observations, the assessment is set aside and the ITO is directed to make a fresh assessment after ascertaining the facts. 5. In the result, the appeal in ITA No. 1533 (Del)/1985 is allowed for statistical purposes.
-
1986 (4) TMI 111 - ITAT DELHI-C
... ...
... ... ..... the Supreme Court is that it enables the ITO to have a reasonable basis for computing the quantum of capital gains and it provides a basis for a best judgement assessment for the actual consideration received by the assessee. However, the first requirement is that there should be an understatement of the sale consideration. We would, therefore, uphold the objection of the learned Counsel for the assessee that the reopening of the assessment under s. 147(b) cannot be upheld. We also agree with the ld. Counsel for the assessee that s. 147(a) was not at all applicable. The reopening of the assessment was, therefore, invalid. 11. Coming to the merits of the case, we need not go into the details at all and we entirely agree wit the ld. CIT(A) that having regard to the ratio of the Supreme Court decision in the case of K. P. Verghese the addition in respect of capital gains must be deleted. 12. In the result, the Departmental appeal is dismissed and the cross-objection is allowed.
-
1986 (4) TMI 110 - ITAT DELHI-C
... ...
... ... ..... he application of the observation of the Hon rsquo ble Supreme Court referred to above. At the time of hearing, the ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that the ITO could do it but it was not open to the Tribunal to give such a direction. We do not agree. The question of taxation has to be decided on the facts each case and in accordance with the law as interpreted by the Supreme Court. In the present case capital gain has to be assessed by the IT Department and the matter has come up before us at the instance of the Revenue. In the situation, we would be failing in our duty if we do not let the matter be considered after ascertaining certain facts and in the light of thoughtful observations of their Lordships of the Supreme Court. 8. With these observations, the orders of the CIT(A) as well as the ITO are set aside and the ITO is directed to ascertain full facts and then proceed to make assessment in accordance with law. 9. For statistical purposes, the appeal is allowed.
-
1986 (4) TMI 109 - ITAT DELHI-B
... ...
... ... ..... ch of this Tribunal in the case of M. P. Rathi and the Tribunal had decided the matter in assessee rsquo s favour. The following observation made by the Tribunal in its order can be referred with advantage which appears at p. 31 of the assessee rsquo s paper book In as much as we are satisfied that the provisions of Rent Control Act were applicable to the premises situate in Gwalior Rayon Colony which were partly let out to the employees of Gwalior Rayon and partly to the outsiders and also on account of the fact that in respect of a similar accommodation the rent controller of Gwalior had fixed the standard rent at Rs. 30 p.m. We do not see any justification for the assessment of any perquisite in the share of accommodation allegedly provided on concessional rent. The order of the AAC is therefore, disapproved and the assessment of Rs. 1,079 is vacated. 5. In view of what has been discussed above, we find no merit in any of the appeals and they are consequentially dismissed.
-
1986 (4) TMI 108 - ITAT DELHI-A
... ...
... ... ..... to make two separate assessments for the two period noted above. The Department is in appeal. 4. Smt. S. Kapila supported the order of the ITO. According to her, the IT Act was a self-contained code. Since this case fell squarely within the language of s. 117 (2) (a) it had to be looked upon as a mere change in the constitution of the old firm and not as a case of succession whatever may be the provisions of the Partnership Act 1932. For the assessee, Shri Jagdish Prasad, ld. counsel relied upon the case of Bal Kishan Dass Hari Kisan Das. 5. In the above decision, the Delhi High Court referred to s. 42 (c) of the Indian Partnership Act and has endorsed the view that in view of the position prevailing under the partnership law in terms of s. 42(c), the ITO in such cases cannot invoke s. 271 (1) (a) and it had to be held to be case of succession. Following with respect Bal Kishan Dass Hari Kisan Das we would maintain the order of the AAC as correct. 6. The appeal is dismissed.
-
1986 (4) TMI 107 - ITAT DELHI-A
... ...
... ... ..... also as to why the return was not filed even after the receipt of the notice. No explanation petition was filed either. Thus, the assessee has not been able to bring on record that she was prevented from filing the return after the notice. No doubt there may be mens rea but there is no explanation either for the default. Since there is no justification for default the penalty after the receipt of notice was rightly exigible as the default was complete without any explanation. However, the period of delay should be taken at 13 months i.e. form 1st June, 1979 to 30th June, 1980 since upto May, 1979 the return could be filed without any penalty and in July, 1980 the return was filed also. Thus we confirm the penalty but take the delay of 13 months. The ld. AAC in our view was not justified to cancel the penalty order altogether and at the same time the ld. ITO was also not justified to impose the penalty for 35 months. 10. In the result the appeal is allowed to the above extent.
-
1986 (4) TMI 106 - ITAT DELHI-A
... ...
... ... ..... wing any part of the commission paid by the assessee to Impex commercial Corporation. The Tribunal, discussed the issue at length and commuted upon all the aspects of the enquiries made by the ITO which are to the same effect as for the assessment year under appeal. Pointed reference is made to paras. 13 to 21 of the said order dt.10th June, 1981. The said order of the Tribunal is10th June, 1981where, the facts remaining the same, the Tribunal held commission payment made to Impex Commercial Corporation as being allowable, the re-assessment order is dt.23rd March, 1983i.e. of a latter date that of the order of the Tribunal mentioned above and accordingly the merits have been discussed there, there was no jurisdiction of any re-opening much less making of any addition. On this score also the re-opening cannot be sustained. 12. Either way of the net result is that the impugned of the ld. CIT(A) being based on proper appreciation of facts and law stands upheld. The appeal fails.
-
1986 (4) TMI 105 - ITAT DELHI-A
... ...
... ... ..... e in question was assessable in the individual hands of Maharaja Prithvi Raj. 10. So far as the ground under s. 2(m) for asst. yr. 1977-78 is concerned, the WTO has to allow exemption to the assessee under s. 2(m) in accordance with law. It is, however to be examined as to what further directions are necessary in that regard. It has been held by the Supreme Court in the case of CWT vs. Kanti Lal Manilal (1985) 45 CTR (SC) 220 (1985) 152 ITR 447 (SC) that a debt can be held to be outstanding on the valuation date only if the notice of demand pursuant to order is served on the assessee before the valuation date. We, therefore, direct the WTO to compute the arrears of the wealth-tax liabilities under s. 2(m) of the WT Act, 1957 for the asst. yr. 1977-78 and to allow the same to the assessee in accordance with law and in view the aforesaid decision of the Supreme Court. 11. In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Department are all partly allowed as above.
-
1986 (4) TMI 104 - ITAT DELHI-A
Business Expenditure, Tour Of Company's Executives ... ... ... ... ..... e. We do not wish to recount again the facts relating to this point because here again we find that the Tribunal for the assessment year 1975-76 in the assessee s own case decided that these deposits are not in the nature of income. The is question of treating them as income does not, therefore, arise. What is more we are told that the reference application filed by the department was also rejected by the Tribunal in Reference Application No. 943 (Delhi) of 1984 dated15-2-1985. We, therefore, confirm the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) on this point also. 18. Before we part with this order, we would like to place on record our deep sense of appreciation at the very elaborate order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) discussing each and very point thoroughly and lucidly, nor do we refrain from expressing our admirations at the able assistance provided to us by both the representatives who appeared before us. 19. In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed.
-
1986 (4) TMI 103 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... r way of meeting the above requirement is to restore the issue to the file of the ITO who may then examine the evidence or documents or cross examine the witness produced by the appellant and also bring his own evidence or documents on record, in rebuttal of the additional evidence produced. In the second alternative the ITO is given free hand to take full benefit of the requirements of sub. (3). The scope of first alternative on the contrary is not that wide as in the second case. The setting aside of the order of the ITO and restoring the issue to his file for predetermining the issue afresh after taking all material into account, in our opinion, is in full compliance of sub-r. (3) of r. 46A. The issue has been restored to the file of the ITO by the CIT(A) to give the ITO as reasonable opportunity as envisaged in sub-r. (3). We, therefore, do not find any merit in these grounds of appeal as well and the same are rejected as such. 12. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.
-
1986 (4) TMI 102 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... he assessee submitted that it is a covered issue but the attempt of the ld. senior departmental representative was that there is no proof regarding rendering of services during the year under consideration and he wanted to persuade us to have a different view. When the papers placed before us in the form of certificates from Prabhat Woollen Mills Sind Knitwears (P) Ltd., Nagesh Hosiery Mills, Kohinoor Woollen Mills, Ludhiana Wool Syndicate, Modella Woollens Ltd., Wellman (Hindustan) Pvt. Ltd., Amritsar Worsted spinners, Bombay Fibre Industries Ltd etc., are looked in detail in our earlier order, we find that the issue is covered on all fours. There is no difference either in facts or in arguments of both the parties. The action of the CIT (A) is in conformity with the tribunal s decision pertaining to asst. yr. 1980-81. As such this ground in the Revenue s appeal is also dismissed. 9. In the result, the assessee s appeal is party allowed and that of the Revenue is dismissed.
-
1986 (4) TMI 101 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... ., Bran Traders, though was less that the rate of supply by M/s Satpal Suresh Kumar. Since in respect of these two parties, the rate but was less than the maximum accepted rate but more than average accepted rate, we are constrained to opine that there could be no occasion for the ITO to have suspected and inflation of purchase price. Normally, we should have closed our finding on this issue here because for the year under consideration the addition is made only on the basis of low yield rate but since in subsequent year addition is made on the strength of non-availability of parties and again on suspicion we are of the view that this aspect of the matter we should deal at length. Paras 55 to 58 are deleted as content thereof are not very relevant to the main issue. Ed. 59. Ground Nos. 11 and 12 of the Revenue appal do not call for any adjudication as they are of general nature. 60. In the result, the assessee s appeal is partly allowed and the Revenue s appeal is dismissed.
-
1986 (4) TMI 100 - ITAT CALCUTTA-C
... ...
... ... ..... 1980) 121 ITR 339 (AP) and A. Sethumadhavan vs. CIT Kerala-II and Anr. (1980) 16 CTR (Ker) 376 (1980) 122 ITR 587 (ker). On the other hand, it has been rightly pointed out by the authorised representative for the assessee that the decision in the case of A. Sethumadhavan vs. CIT, Kerala-II was reversed vide Santha S. Shenoy and Ors. vs. Union of India and others (1982) 135 ITR 30 (Ker) and that in this decision the Andhra Pradesh decision in the case of Knagundi Industrial Works (P) Ltd. Was dissented from. As has been pointed out by the CIT (A) the Gujarat and M.P. High Court are also of the view as taken by the Kerala High Courts. These decisions were actually followed by this decisions were actually followed by this Tribunal in the case of the assessee for the asst. yr. 1981-82 by its order dt. 9th Jan., 1986 in ITA No. 1001(Cal)/1984. So we do not think that the CIT (A) was incorrect in this finding. As such this appeal must fail. 4. As a result, the appeal is dismissed.
-
1986 (4) TMI 99 - ITAT CALCUTTA-C
Penalty, Non-filing Of Advance Tax ... ... ... ... ..... nce tax demand under section 210 was also to be invalid. But in the instant case, the validity of the notice under section 210 was sustained by the Tribunal. The penalty in the case of this assessee has not been based merely on rejection of the assessee s explanation, but on the facts and in the circumstances of the case noted earlier as discussed in the orders of the authorities below. 22. The decision relied have been rendered in the circumstances of those cited cases, which were different from those of the assessee. 23. Having regard to the various submissions made before us and after considering different decisions cited and considered by the authorities below and as discussed by us above and having regard to the circumstances, we cannot subscribe to the view of the Commissioner (Appeals) in the instant case. We cannot, therefore, sustain his order. Accordingly, his order is reversed and that of the ITO is restored. 24. In the result, the appeal by the revenue is allowed.
-
1986 (4) TMI 98 - ITAT CALCUTTA-C
Business Expenditure, Sales Promotion Expenses ... ... ... ... ..... h the tourists and made expenditure on shamiana , light, drinks and food, etc. Extra expenditure thereon would, therefore, be a sort of sales promotion. In this view of the matter, in our judgment, the entire amount of Rs. 33,848 should be treated as expenditure on sales promotion . 7. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) treated Rs. 5,000 out of the said expenditure as expenditure on entertainment for which we do not find any basis. On the other hand, by doing so he has contradicted his own finding that the balance of Rs. 28,848 should be treated as sales promotion expenses. If the amount of Rs. 33,848 contained any element of entertainment there is no foundation for carving out Rs. 5,000 only as expenditure on entertainment. On that premises, the entire amount should have been taken as expenditure on entertainment. But as discussed above, the entire amount is expenditure on sales promotion. We, therefore, find no merit in the appeal. 8. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.
-
1986 (4) TMI 97 - ITAT CALCUTTA-B
... ...
... ... ..... allowable as the event giving rise to the statutory liability happened during the previous year. The facts of the case before us are entirely different. Hence, we uphold the decision of the CIT(A) on both the points viz., the allowance of Rs. 2,57,304 and the disallowance of the balance of Rs. 82,14,425. 14. The only other ground in this assessee s appeal states that the assessee s claim to deduct sur-tax liability while computing its income under the IT Act should have been allowed. We find that this issue is covered against the assessee by the decision in the case of Molins of India Ltd. vs. CIT (1983) 35 CTR (Cal) 254 (1983) 144 ITR 317 (Cal). Respectfully following the aforesaid decision, we uphold the order of the CIT(A) on this point and reject this ground. 15. Now we come to the Departmental appeal. We have already disposed of the only ground taken in this appeal in favour of the assessee. Hence, we reject this ground. 16. In the result, both the appeal are dismissed.
-
1986 (4) TMI 96 - ITAT CALCUTTA-B
Refund, Interest On Refund ... ... ... ... ..... his year. However, the position for the assessment year 1976-77 is different. Here, the amount under consideration is a sum of Rs. 2,033 paid before the regular assessment by way of advance tax and self-assessment was kept as a deposit to be adjusted against the demand to be raised on regular assessment. When the assessment is set aside with a direction to the ITO to do the regular assessment fresh, then status quo ante is restored. In other words, the advance tax and self-assessment tax paid by the assessee again became deposits which are not immediately refundable to the assessee but had to be kept as deposits to be adjusted against the regular assessment again to be made by the ITO in accordance with the directions of the appellate authority. Hence, we reverse the order of the AAC for the assessment year 1976-77 and restore that of the ITO. 8. In the result, the appeal for the assessment year 1968-69 is dismissed while the appeal for the assessment year 1976-77 is allowed.
-
1986 (4) TMI 95 - ITAT CALCUTTA-B
Deduction Of Tax At Source, Payment To Non-Residents, Appeal To AAC. ... ... ... ... ..... nt to be wholly exempt from tax. His remedy is to start assessment proceeding in the case of the recipient and put forward his claim that the entire sum is exempt. When the sub-section says that the whole of such sum would not be income chargeable in the case of the recipient it implies that some portion of that sum is considered to be liable to tax. If no portion is considered to be liable to tax then, in our opinion, section 195(2) does not come into play at all. 7. We find that the assessee applied to the ITO under section 195(2) for a declaration that the sum to be remitted was totally exempt from tax. This petition under section 195(2) was evidently misconceived. Consequently, the order passed by the ITO thereof, and the subsequent appellate order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) are equally misconceived. Thus, we come to the conclusion that the present appeal before us is not maintainable. Hence, we reject the same as such. 8. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.
-
1986 (4) TMI 94 - ITAT BOMBAY-E
... ...
... ... ..... ing whether an item is deductible the matter has to be looked at from the point of view of the payer. 10. The totality of the circumstances have also to be looked into and in the present case the respondent firm has been assessed at an income of Rs. 35,65,020 and the claim of Rs. 25,090 forms a very negligible proportion thereto. Further the respondent firm has earned a substantial amount of fees as a result of its association with the internationally known accounting firm. The expenditure on the travelling expenses of the wife of the senior partner have been necessitated by commercial expediency. We, accordingly, hold that it is an admissible deduction and confirm the order of the CIT(A) on this point. 11. As regards the claim under s. 35B on the aforesaid expenditure of Rs. 25,090 the ld. Departmental Representative did not challenge the same and the order of the CIT(A) on this point is confirmed as well. 12. In view of the above, the appeal of the Department is dismissed.
............
|
