|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 121 to 140 of 283 Records
-
1989 (2) TMI 164 - ITAT HYDERABAD-B
Assessment Year, Capital Gains ... ... ... ... ..... vidence also stands precluded by virtue of provisions of sections 91 and 92 of the Evidence Act, 1872 according to which when the terms of any disposition of property etc. have been reduced to the form of a document..... no evidence shall be given in proof of the terms of such disposition of property except the document itself...... This being the position on facts and in law, we are unable to give weight to the statement of Shri Bishanlal to prove that not the sum of Rs. 3 lakhs but an amount of Rs. 3.5 lakhs passed on from them to the appellant as sale consideration. 7. We are also not impressed by the contention raised by the learned Senior Departmental Representative that some money passes away over and above the sale consideration shown in a sale deed. Firstly we are not aware of any such practice and secondly even if in some stray cases it happens, it would be too risky to draw an inference and standardise it in law. 8. In the result, the appeal succeeds and is allowed.
-
1989 (2) TMI 163 - ITAT HYDERABAD-A
Assessment Year, Interest Payable ... ... ... ... ..... some reasons or other, the HUFs have separated these two assets and have partitioned only one. Now since right to receive profit cannot stand in isolation in respect of any business venture, there has to be some commitment on the part of those who claim profit from the business. Either they should bring their own capital or they could bring the capital by borrowing funds from others. On the facts of this case, the inference to be drawn here is that the smaller HUFs have brought capital by borrowing from the larger HUFS. If that is the correct finding of fact, then the interest debited represents the interest payable by the smaller HUFs to the larger HUFs. Therefore, the interest has to be disallowed, not under s. 40(b), but as interest not relating to the business of the assessee. It is the interest payable by the smaller HUF, and not by the firm. On these different grounds, we will uphold the order of the Income-tax Officer. 14. In the result, both the appeals stand allowed.
-
1989 (2) TMI 162 - ITAT HYDERABAD-A
Agricultural Land, Assessment Year, Capital Asset, Capital Gains ... ... ... ... ..... e had intention of cultivation. Therefore, the case relied on by the department can be easily distinguished. 11. Under these circumstances, we are of opinion that the issue in this case is covered by the Andhra Pradesh High Court s decision in J. Raghottama Reddy s case and the land cannot be treated as capital asset. No capital gains can be levied. 12. With regard to the departmental appeal, the issue would arise only if capital gains has to be assessed. Since no capital gains can be assessed in this case, the issue becomes academic. However, the ground raised by the department has to be allowed. Solatium is certainly part of the consideration for transfer and is includible. The Appellate Asstt. Commissioner is patently wrong in his decision. However, it is not going to affect the ultimate finding that no capital gains would be assessable. Under these peculiar circumstances, we have to hold that the departmental appeal is to be dismissed and the assessee s appeal is allowed.
-
1989 (2) TMI 161 - ITAT HYDERABAD-A
A Partner, Assessment Year, Change In Constitution Of Firm, Partnership Deed, Partnership Firm
-
1989 (2) TMI 160 - ITAT DELHI-E
Assessment Year, Gift Tax ... ... ... ... ..... be of any help to the revenue for the simple reason that the gift there is seen to have been made to the assessee s mother whereas in the case before us the transfer was in favour of the assessee s unmarried daughter. Moreover the ratio in the said case is not required to be followed as the same Hon ble High Court in the subsequent judgment in the case of Bandi Subba Rao has pronounced a different ratio which we are following for deciding the present appeal. We, in fact, are following the recent and subsequent ratio of the Hon ble High Court and therein we see no impropriety or error. We may as well mention that there is no evidence that the subject matter of transfer and accretion thereon was not utilised by the donee at the time of her marriage. On account of that also the action of the revenue authorities could not be sustained. 8. In the light of the above discussion, we quash the finding under challenge and so also of the ld. GTO. 9. In the result the appeal is allowed.
-
1989 (2) TMI 159 - ITAT DELHI-E
Assessment Year, Closing Stock, Industrial Undertaking, Market Value ... ... ... ... ..... of valuation of closing stock, as under that the assessee was entitled to change his method of valuation of stock in this manner even though the revenue may be affected adversely by such change. It is a concession given to the assessee based on the well recognised usage of the trade, and the principle underlying that concession is in no way violated when the assessee changes his method of valuation from cost to market value, when the latter is less than the cost price, provided the change is bona fide and the new system is continued in subsequent years. The assessee s claim for deduction of Rs. 1,41,035 was allowable in law. 7. The Revenue has nowhere proved that it was not bona fide. The action of the CIT (Appeals) is, therefore, reversed and the assessee s contention is accepted. 8 to 10. These paras are not reproduced here as they involved minor issues. 11. In the result assessee s appeals for all the three years shall be treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes.
-
1989 (2) TMI 158 - ITAT DELHI-D
... ...
... ... ..... the tax so determined. 8. In the light of the above discussion we are clear that no doubt the tax already paid may be in excess of the assessed tax while treating the status as registered firm but in view of the provision contained in sub-s. (2) of s. 271 the penalty for late filing of returns were clearly leviable as the status was to be taken as URF. The justification or taking such status could be that registered firm since enjoys certain benefit because of that status he is supposed to comply with the provisions of law faithfully and promptly so that the benefits may be available of. When the type of default we are concerned with is committed naturally some sanction was necessary and that sanction in the present case is contained in sub-s. (2). The penalties were since rightly leviable and were correctly confirmed by the learned AAC. In the light of the above discussion and in fact agreeing with the reasons of the learned first appellate authority we refuse to interfere.
-
1989 (2) TMI 157 - ITAT DELHI-D
... ...
... ... ..... t bring out the requisite particulars and accordingly the observation of the CIT(A) that no details were filed before him cannot be said to be wrong in these circumstances and accordingly we confirm the disallowance. 18. In regard to the extra shift allowance on plant and machinery it was pleaded that the CIT(A) was wrong in his observation that no details were available. The learned senior Departmental Representative relied on the orders of the authorities below. On this issue we have confirm the findings of the authorities below for the reason that the assessee had not been able to establish that it had made the claim before the ITO and that all evidence on record of such a claim was available in his possession. Even before us or before the CIT(A) as per his order, the assessee has not provided any such evidence. In the absence of such an evidence we do not find any merit in this ground raised by the assessee. 19. In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part.
-
1989 (2) TMI 156 - ITAT DELHI-C
... ...
... ... ..... ith the learned first appellate authority. In our view, approach of the learned AAC was diametrically opposed to the ratio in the case of SUSHIL ANSAL (1986) 160 ITR 308 (Del) wherein (1966) 61 ITR 428 (SC) has been noted and 1982 133 ITR 840 (Bom) dissented. Thus the principal reliance of the assessee on (1982) 133 ITR 840 (Bom) is seen now as not available on account of the ratio in the case of SUSHIL ANSAL. In this case also the assessee was receiving rental income from a premises of which he was not the legal owner. The facts before us now in the present case and in the case before the Hon rsquo ble Delhi High Court in the case of SUSHIL ANSAL appear to be akin. Thus with due deference to the other Hon rsquo ble Courts we are of the view that in the present case the ratio relied upon the jurisdictional High court is required to be relied and by doing the same we vacate the finding under challenge and restore that of the learned ITO. 9. In the result the appeal is allowed.
-
1989 (2) TMI 155 - ITAT DELHI-C
... ...
... ... ..... the cases mentioned hereinabove it is seen as if the assessee could be considered to have a reasonable cause for delay which was caused on account of the conduct of the learned advocate. It is also seen from the perusal of the ratio that right of appeal was substantial one and should not be allowed to get lost on account of some mere technicalities. Thus keeping in view the above observations we are of the view that in this case there was sufficient ground for condoning the delay which was caused on account of the conduct of the learned counsel and was likely to result in miscarriage of justice as the assessee rsquo s valuable right of appeal is seen to have lost or forfeited. Thus taking into consideration all these things we are inclined to condone the delay in filing the appeal and after doing so restore the matter to the file of the learned AAC for decision afresh on merit. We do accordingly. 5. In the result the appeal be treated as allowed for the purpose of statistics.
-
1989 (2) TMI 154 - ITAT DELHI-B
... ...
... ... ..... to determine whether every material fact, for and against the assessee, has been considered fairly and with due care whether the evidence pro and con has been considered in reaching the final conclusions and whether the conclusion reached by the Tribunal has been coloured by irrelevant considerations or matters of prejudice. 14. From this and in view, we have ourselves very carefully gone through the order of the Tribunal and we do not find that on the tests laid down above, the order of the Tribunal could be challenged as it considered all relevant details minutely and drew necessary factual inferences in a fair, reasonable and impartial manner. We, therefore, see no reason to entertain the miscellaneous petition filed by the Revenue as there is no mistake apparent from record within the meaning of s. 254. As such, there is no justification either for recalling the order or for making an order of amendment under s. 254 of the Act. 15. The miscellaneous petition is dismissed.
-
1989 (2) TMI 153 - ITAT DELHI-B
... ...
... ... ..... the assessee was in our view entitled to 100 per cent depreciation thereon and, accordingly, allowing this claim, we direct the ITO to allow depreciation on the said item at 100 per cent. 5. The next point raised in this appeal is about the grant of investment allowance and relief under 80J. These claims have been rejected by the authorities below on the ground that the assessee was not an industrial undertaking. This point in our view is covered by a judgment of Hon rsquo ble the Delhi High Court in CIT vs. MINOCHA BROS PVT LTD (1986) 52 CTR (Del) 346 (1986) 160 ITR 134 (Del) in which it was held that a private company engaged in the business of construction of buildings was not an industrial undertaking and that a builder did not process or manufacture goods and the real activity of the assessee was only to construct buildings. These claims were, therefore, rightly denied by the authorities below and we uphold their decision. 6. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed.
-
1989 (2) TMI 152 - ITAT DELHI-B
... ...
... ... ..... ve been spent by the assessee rsquo s wife out of her income. The ITO held that the withdrawals were insufficient to meet the household expenses of the assessee. He, therefore, made addition of Rs. 11,000 which has been upheld by the CIT(A). So far as the wife rsquo s drawings are concerned, they have to be neglected as we have held above that the wife is not shown to have any income at all. So far as the extent of domestic expenditure is concerned, the learned counsel for the assessee did not point out how the same could be met out of a meagre sum of Rs. 7,000. The way the assessee has been living is indicated by the fact that he purchased three automobiles. In asst. yr. 1979-80 also, an addition of Rs. 16,800 was upheld by this Tribunal, vide order dt.30th Sept., 1986in ITA No. 3976/84. In that year, the drawings were of the order of Rs. 7,200. In view of these facts, the addition of Rs. 11,000 is reasonable and we uphold the same. 9. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.
-
1989 (2) TMI 151 - ITAT DELHI-B
... ...
... ... ..... restored the matter to the ITO, the addition made by the ITO did not survive and consequently, the penalties levied by the ITO did not survive and consequently, the penalties levied by the ITO, the addition made by the ITO did not survive and consequently, the penalties levied by the ITO under s. 271(1)(c) and 273(1) cannot survive and have to be cancelled. 8. As regards the contention of the learned counsel for the assessee that the assessee was under a bona fide that the amendment brought about from 1st April, 1976 did not affect cases where the minors had been admitted to the benefits of partnership prior to 1st April, 1976 we do not want to adjudicate thereon as in view of what we have said above, it is not necessary to do so and might prejudice the parties in any subsequent proceedings, if any. 9. In the result, both the appeals are allowed and the penalties in question are hereby cancelled. It would be open to the AO to take action in this regard, if permissible in law.
-
1989 (2) TMI 150 - ITAT DELHI-B
... ...
... ... ..... assessee-company but booked as staff welfare expenditure. The details furnished at page 101 of the paper book clearly show that a sum of Rs. 11,537 was spent on snacks provided to the staff inDelhioffice and a sum of Rs. 7,046 on kitchen expenditure for staff atBombaybranch and that the entertainment expenditure was only Rs. 2,344 included in the overall expenditure of Rs. 21,186. There is therefore no justification whatsoever for the disallowance of this expenditure incurred on staff welfare, which even by definition or requirement of law was not to be regarded to be as entertainment expenditure. This disallowance is therefore uncalled for and is deleted. We find no justification whatsoever for the view that 50 per cent of the staff welfare expenditure was in the nature of entertainment expenditure. 11. The last ground regarding the investment allowance of Rs. 13,353 was not pressed. There is no other ground to be dealt with. 12. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part.
-
1989 (2) TMI 149 - ITAT DELHI-B
Reassessment, Non Disclosure Of Primary Facts ... ... ... ... ..... ls are allowed and the reassessments made by the ITO are cancelled. Shri Inder Chand Jain (I.T.A. Nos. 2638 and 2639) 22. These are two appeals by Shri Inder Chand Jain in his porsonal capacity. They relate to assessment years 1980-81 and 1981-82. The facts are identical to the case of Smt. Munia Devi Jain and, therefore, following the view taken above, we cancel the reassessment for asst. year 1980-81, while we uphold the assessment for assessment year 1981-82. In the result, I.T.A. No. 2638 stands allowed, while I.T.A. No. 2639 stands dismissed. Sh. Rakesh Kumar Jain (I.T.A. Nos. 2640 and 2641). 23. In this case, the appeals relate to assessment years 1980-81 and 1981-82. The facts are identical to the case of Smt. Munia Devi Jain and, therefore, following the view taken above, we cancel the reassessment for assessment year 1980-81 and we uphold the assessment for assessment year 1981-82. In the result, I.T.A. No. 2640 stands allowed, while I.T.A. No. 2641 stands dismissed.
-
1989 (2) TMI 148 - ITAT DELHI-B
A Firm, Assessment Year ... ... ... ... ..... ade by the firm to any partner has to be disallowed by virtue of the provisions of section 40(b) of the Act. This is a special provision made by the Legislature and, therefore, on the principle of generalia specialibus non derogant, it must be accordingly applied to the case of any firm . 13. In this process of computation of total income of the firm, the question of assessment of partners and the manner and method in which the income is to be computed in their hands is not relevant. That is one reason, we have not adverted to various provisions under the statute in relation thereto. The ld. AAC, therefore, erroneously took that aspect into consideration to hold that the claim of the assessee that the said process amounts to double taxation and as such was not warranted by law, was acceptable. As such, the AAC erred in reversing the orders of the ITO. The impugned orders of the AAC are, therefore, set aside and the order of the ITO restored for each year. 14. Appeals allowed.
-
1989 (2) TMI 147 - ITAT DELHI-B
Assessment Year, Business Expenditure, Deductions In Respect, Disclosure Petition, Income From House Property, Set Off, Voluntary Disclosure Scheme, Wholly And Exclusively
-
1989 (2) TMI 146 - ITAT DELHI-A
... ...
... ... ..... ental Representative very vehemently contended that whatever may be the reasons recorded, the approach taken and the CIT(A) s final decision in confirming the penalty was correct, but we agree with Shri M.S. Syali s arguments, that the reasons which prompted the assessee to seek adjournment could not and should not have prompted an ex parte order from the learned first appellate authority. 8. In our considered view after having accepted the assessees request made on 14th Feb., 1986, the assessee s request on 19th Feb., 1986 could be termed as tactics avoiding hearing because the factual aspect as stated by the assessee did not come for any adverse comments from the CIT(A). 9. We, therefore, without going into the merits of the case, whether on the given facts penalty was exigible, restore the case back to the CIT(A) s file for fresh adjudication expeditiously from the stage of filing of the appeal before the first appellate authority. 10. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1989 (2) TMI 145 - ITAT DELHI-A
... ...
... ... ..... 263 includes the failure to make such an inquiry. The order becomes erroneous because such an inquiry has not been made and not because there is anything wrong with the order if all the facts stated therein are assumed to be correct. 8. Before parting we like to observe that on a query from the Bench Mr. Ganeshan Stated that in the fresh assessments framed in respect of asst. yr. 1982-83 in pursuance of and compliance to the CIT rsquo s order under s. 263 the ITO has not made any addition in respect of loans and investments the non-investigation of which, as per the CIT, led to the setting aside of the original assessment. However, in relation to fresh assessment the right of parties cannot be affected by the order setting aside the original assessment and, therefore, we are not adverting to that order at all. The dispute in relation to assessments for the latter two years was stated to have still not reached the final stage. 9. In the result, all the three appeals dismissed.
............
|
