|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 161 to 180 of 290 Records
-
1990 (3) TMI 137 - ITAT MADRAS-C
Default In Payment, Interest On Deposit ... ... ... ... ..... can only refer to a ceiling in respect of the aggregate repayments of deposits or interest and not any individual repayment of a depositor interest. Otherwise the document itself will be infructuous inasmuch as the total deposits being only Rs. 30 lakhs the question of default of interest in one lakh is quite remote and could not be a ceiling prescribed for the operation of the enforcement provision. One of the canons of the construction of the document is such that it should be so construed as it makes it workable and not to be self-defeating. Reading the document as a whole, it is clear that the deposits have been fully secured and the transaction therefore falls within the exception provided in item (ix) of section 40A(8). It follows that the Income-tax Officer was right in not making the disallowance prescribed under that section and his order did not require to be reviewed under section 263. Therefore, the order made under section 263 is cancelled. The appeal is allowed
-
1990 (3) TMI 136 - ITAT MADRAS-C
Assessment Order ... ... ... ... ..... balances and consider whether there was any income or not. The finding for the assessment year 1982-83 will have a definite bearing on the assessment for the year 1983-84 also. Apart from this, the claim that one of the groups had gone out from 14-11-1982 would also have to be processed on merits, and to the extent any part of the claim may be tenable, that would have a bearing on the apportionment of the income between the partners inter se. Hence we consider that the proper course for the assessment year 1983-84 will be to set aside the orders of the authorities below, viz. the ITO as well as the CIT(Appeals), Madurai and direct the Assessing Officer to make a fresh assessment in accordance with law. For the sake of completeness, though it has no bearing on our findings, we may state that we were informed that the jurisdiction now vests with the Assistant Commissioner (Investigation), Trichy. 21. The result is, all the appeals are treated as allowed for statistical purposes
-
1990 (3) TMI 133 - ITAT MADRAS-B
... ...
... ... ..... rged. In that situation the assessee is put to proof and it is open to the assessee to prove in the penalty proceedings that the admission made by him during the course of assessment proceedings was wrongly or illegally made or was incorrect. He can lead evidence during penalty proceedings to show that he had not concealed any income or furnished inaccurate particulars thereof. If he fails to prove this, the IT Department would be justified in levying penalty on him under s. 271(1)(c) . In this case no attempt was made by the assessee to prove that the admitted income in the revised return was never part of its income in the accounting year in question and therefore in view of the Punjab and Haryana High Court decision cited above I have to hold that the burden which lies on the assessee was not discharged by it and hence I am of the opinion that the penalty on the assessee was correctly levied. No interference is therefore called for. The appeal of the assessee is dismissed.
-
1990 (3) TMI 130 - ITAT MADRAS-A
Accounting Year, Let Out ... ... ... ... ..... uld be Hindu undivided family property in his hands vis-a-vis his own son that would amount to creating two classes among the heirs mentioned in class I, the male heirs in whose hands it will be joint Hindu family property vis-a-vis their sons and female heirs with respect to whom no such concept could be applied or contemplated. Under no circumstance the assessee Hindu undivided family would inherit property. After Krishnappa Chetty died the question is in what capacity his sons Venkatachalam and Gopalakrishnan inherited the individual properties of their father Krishnappa Chetty. Again the aforesaid, two decisions themselves would clearly point out that they would inherit it in their individual capacity and not as representing their respective Hindu undivided families. 9. Under the circumstances I hold that the orders of the lower authorities are perfectly justified and there is no ground made out to interfere with them. In the result the appeal of the assessee is dismissed
-
1990 (3) TMI 129 - ITAT MADRAS-A
Lease Rent, Previous Year, Revenue Expenditure ... ... ... ... ..... nditure. The source or the manner of the payment would then be of no consequence. Applying the aforesaid ratio of this decision of the Supreme Court also, it has to be held that the sum of Rs. 4 lakhs paid by the assessee was only revenue expenditure and cannot be regarded as capital expenditure. 17. Similarly, the ratio of the decision of the Madras High Court in Pioneer Engg. Syndicate s case is only in favour of the assessee, far from supporting the revenue s case, as could be seen from the head note itself. 18. We, therefore, respectfully follow the two decisions of the Supreme Court referred to above, as well as the decision of the Madras High Court in the case of Madras, Auto Service Ltd. and the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Gemini Arts (P.) Ltd. and hold that the CIT (Appeals) was right in allowing the assessee s claim for deduction of the sum of Rs. 4 lakhs as revenue expenditure. Accordingly we confirm the order of the CIT (Appeals) and dismiss this appeal
-
1990 (3) TMI 128 - ITAT MADRAS-A
Accounting Year, Borrowed Monies, In Part, Tax At Source ... ... ... ... ..... ence of any other acceptable evidence that the dates on which the credit had been given in the accounts of the assessee viz. 30th June of the respective accounting years, should be taken as the dates on which interest is credited. In the circumstances, the assessee had to pay the amounts of TDS within two months from those dates. Since it has not been done, we hold that the ITO is justified in charging interest u/s 201(1A). We may also mention here that the Board in its Circular No. 288 dt. 22-12-1980 had clarified that the tax on interest credited will be payable to the Government not on the basis when the closing entries are actually made, but on the basis of the due date according to Rule 30 of the Income-tax Rules for payment of tax falls i.e., within two months from the expiration of the month in which the accounts of the assessee are made falls. In our opinion, this Circular lays down the correct position of law. 10. In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are allowed
-
1990 (3) TMI 124 - ITAT JAIPUR
... ...
... ... ..... w and the controversy finally being set at rest by the Supreme Court on 25th Jan., 1985, i.e., much after the date on which the assessee was required to comply with the provisions of the Act vis-a-vis the payment of advance tax in the assessment year under consideration. Even otherwise on mala fide intention has been proofed on the part of the assessee by the Department. This becomes important when viewed in the light of the assessee filing an estimate of showing an income of Rs. 90,000 although subsequently the returned income was Rs. Nil. The fact that it did not pay the advance tax was a matter which could have invited the penalty provisions of s.221(1) but the non-payment by itself could not be used against the assessee when deciding whether the penalty under s. 273(1)(a) was exigible or not. 10. In the final analysis we opine that the penalty under s. 273(1)(a) was not exigible on the facts and the circumstances of the case. We cancel the same. 11. The appeal is allowed.
-
1990 (3) TMI 123 - ITAT HYDERABAD-B
Additional Tax, Amnesty Scheme, Cinema Theatre, Debt Owed, Net Wealth, Tax Liability, Valuation Officer
-
1990 (3) TMI 122 - ITAT HYDERABAD-A
Central Government, Previous Year, Small Scale Industries, Trading Receipt ... ... ... ... ..... haracter of the receipt changes. We further hold that the assessee is only a trustee with regard to the amount collected as guarantee commission. The assessee was under a duty to pay the same to the DICGC or to return the same to the loanee institutions. In those circumstances we are of the opinion that the lower authorities went wrong in treating it as part of the income in the hands of the assessee. We, therefore, delete the amount of Rs. 89,60,696 from the computed income in the hands of APSFC. 30. Though there is another ground with regard to the levy of interest under sections 139(8) and 215 raised in the grounds of appeal before this Tribunal, both sides agreed that it would go consequential with the primary ground already decided against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee. Therefore since the primary ground is decided, this ground no longer survives for consideration. 31. In the result the appeal filed by the Andhra Pradesh State Financial Corporation is allowed
-
1990 (3) TMI 121 - ITAT GAUHATI
Delay In Filing Return, Late Filing, Reasonable Cause ... ... ... ... ..... ears under appeal, it could not be said that the assessee has estopped from asserting her right in penalty proceedings as there is no estoppel against the statute. In the case of C.K. Mehta 1982 2 SCR, Part I (sic) the Hon ble Supreme Court observed on the facts of that case that there is marked difference between the assertion and estoppel. It was observed that a man is not estopped from asserting a right which he had stated that he would not assert. Thus, the fact that in the present case, the assessee did not assert her right of appeal against the inclusion or against the valuation of such included assets in the quantum appeals, yet the assessee is not precluded or estopped from asserting her claim as discussed in the preceding paragraphs in course of the penalty proceedings. 31. Thus, keeping in view the position discussed above, we cannot sustain the orders of the CIT(A) by which he has upheld the penalty orders. 32. In the result, the appeals by the assessee are allowed
-
1990 (3) TMI 120 - ITAT DELHI-E
... ...
... ... ..... the assessee had been assessed on28th March, 1977. 4. Patently, s. 209A, which is the basis of the levy of penalty in question, having been enacted w.e.f.1st June, 1978, was not in force at the relevant time and, therefore, there could be no obligation on the assessee for compliance thereof. Under the law as it existed prior to the enactment of s. 209A, only a person who had not been assessed by way of a regular assessment, was to file an estimate of advance tax if his income was likely to exceed the prescribed limit and for those who had already been assessed it was for the ITO to issue a notice under s. 210. No such notice was issued in this case and the assessee having already been assessed was not obliged to file a voluntary estimate. Therefore, there was no default as mentioned by the ITO and the learned Departmental Representative could not point out how the penalty in question was justified. I, accordingly, allow the appeal. The penalty in question is hereby cancelled.
-
1990 (3) TMI 119 - ITAT DELHI-E
Foreign Company, Investment Allowance, Road Transport Vehicle, Total Income ... ... ... ... ..... n the taxpayer unless the language of the statute is so compelling that the court has no alternative than to accept it. In a case of reasonable doubt, the construction most beneficial to the taxpayer is to be adopted . 10. So it is clear enough that only one tax law would be applicable and not both. By virtue of clause (k) to Art. 371F, it would be clear that only the Sikkim Regulations on Income-tax would be applicable. Therefore, it cannot be brought to tax by applying the rates of Income-tax Act, 1961. 11. The next issue which will arise is, whether the income fromSikkimcould be included for rate purposes. In order to do so, section 86 had to be attracted to the facts and it is clear that section 86 would not be applicable on the facts of the case. Therefore, the income cannot also be taken into account for rate purposes. 12. The assessee s contentions are, therefore, accepted and the inclusion of the income from Sikkim Lotteries would be deleted. 13. The appeal is allowed
-
1990 (3) TMI 118 - ITAT DELHI-E
Advance Tax, Assessing Officer, Assessment Order, Time Limit For Completion ... ... ... ... ..... piry of the period of limitation and the assessee having got the benefit of the refund in pursuance of the Board s instructions cannot now be allowed to contend that the Board s instructions exceeded its authority. 4. As regards the case of Deep Chand Jain the facts were different. In that case no assessment was made and there were no instructions of the Board in terms of sec. 119. The Hon ble High Court was dealing with Writ Petition under Art. 226 while the assessee is coming to this Tribunal by way of an appeal against the assessment order, which, in my view, has been made validly in pursuance of the instructions of the Board and also in accordance with the consent of the assessee, as contained in its letter dated22-2-1985. The assessee, therefore, cannot have a grievance against the assessment made and is not entitled to refund of the entire tax by treating the assessment as null and void. I, therefore, do not find any force in this appeal and the same is hereby dismissed
-
1990 (3) TMI 117 - ITAT DELHI-D
... ...
... ... ..... es for recording and re-recording and it is not the intention of the legislature in levying duty each time when single tape is re-recorded. 12. In the case of Prabhat Associates and Ors. vs. Collector of Central Excise, Bangalore though the appeals were rejected by the majority on a number of issues, we feel that this particular issue, viz., Recording of sound on duty paid magnetic or cassette tapes is a manufacture or not has not been considered in the order delivered by the majority, but this issue was conclusively considered by the Judicial member in his dissenting order and we fully concur with his findings and reasons for the reasons stated above. 13. In the view we have taken, we hold that appellant is not liable to pay any duty or fine for not having manufactured the excisable goods in item 59 of the Schedule and recording sound on duty paid magnetic cassette tapes is not manufacture. 14. In the result we set aside the impugned order and accordingly, appeal is allowed.
-
1990 (3) TMI 116 - ITAT DELHI-D
... ...
... ... ..... e Act. This section used the term manufacture or production of articles . The Court held that, though the pressure piling resulted in laying of the foundation of buildings, but in view of the technology involved, etc., came to hold that, the activity was a manufacturing of an article. Therefore, these two judgments also support the claim of the assessee. The three Tribunal decisions relied upon by the assessee, were considering the granting of investment allowance, under sec. 32A of the Act, containing the words, the business of construction , and have been used in conjunction with the words article or thing . Though the words the business of construction is not contained in sec. 80-I, but having regard to the fact that the Tribunal Decisions have held that building is an article or thing, the absence of the words the business of construction , in our opinion would not make any material difference. 5 to 7. These paragraphs are not reproduced here as they involve minor issues
-
1990 (3) TMI 115 - ITAT DELHI-D
Assessment Proceedings, Charitable Trust, Late Filing, Penalty Notice, Penalty Proceedings, Reasonable Cause
-
1990 (3) TMI 114 - ITAT DELHI-D
Orders Passed ... ... ... ... ..... ment or the other order becomes the subject matter of appeal before the first appellate authority and the limitation in such cases will be counted from the date the consequential order passed by the first appellate authority was served on the Commissioner. Considered from this angle, we are of the opinion that the penalties imposed by the ITO were within the time provided by section 275(a)(ii) of the Income-tax Act. 8. It may be pointed out that the ITO while imposing penalties has not waited till the passing of consequential order by the first appellate authority and has levied the penalties during the pendency of the appeals before the CIT(Appeals). There is no bar against such levy of penalty by the ITO. 9. In view of the above discussions, we are unable to sustain the order of the CIT(Appeals). The same is, therefore, annulled and all the 4 appeals are restored to his file for disposing of the same on merits. 10. In the result, all the 4 appeals by the revenue are allowed
-
1990 (3) TMI 113 - ITAT DELHI-C
Assessing Officer, Assessment Order, Cinema Building, Orders Prejudicial To Interests, Reference To Valuation Officer
-
1990 (3) TMI 112 - ITAT DELHI-B
... ...
... ... ..... e ITO to re-examine this element of the income from the business carried out by the assessee and to what extent addition would be called for. In view of the fact that we have held that the claim of Smt. Bachan Devi in regard to various assets belong to her she is not the benami of Shri Harbans Lal Gupta and, therefore, the same are excluded for being included in the income of the assessee. Similarly, the business of Smt. Sundar Gupta has been admitted and accepted even under s. 132(2) against which there is no further material for taking a different view till the stage before us and also that the hundi business having been found to be belonging to her, the inclusion of any portion of these items in the hands of Shri Harbans Lal Gupta treating her as benami is incorrect and accountingly deleted. 21. In the result, the appeals and cross appeals of the assessee would be treated as allowed in part and similarly the appeals by the Revenue would also be treated as followed in part.
-
1990 (3) TMI 111 - ITAT DELHI-B
... ...
... ... ..... iboi and Co. Pvt. Ltd. (1984) 41 CTR (Bom) 388 (1984) 149 ITR 604 (Bom). Even if we agree with this submission that the deposits were trading receipts the question would still arise whether it would be correct to tax the same in this accounting year. It is no doubt true that the Bombay High Court has upheld the Department s contention that it was the income of the year in which it was written off. But the question as to which is the year in which income arose has not been discussed therein. If this is a trading receipt then it would be assessable in the year of receipt or in the year of sale. Either way, it cannot be taxed for this year. 15. The second ground raised by the Department is the deletion of notional interest of Rs. 63,449. This issue is covered by the decision of the Tribunal for the prior assessment years. Following those orders we uphold the order of the CIT (A). 16. In the result, the assessee s appeal is partly allowed and the Departmental appeal is dismissed.
............
|
