|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 161 to 180 of 359 Records
-
1991 (3) TMI 200 - ITAT DELHI-B
... ...
... ... ..... is with regard to the extent of reduction. The assessee has adopted a basis for estimating the income. At best, it could be said that the assessee has committed a mistake in calculating the income. However, there is no material on record suggesting deliberate attempt on the part of the assessee to file an underestimate with the idea of reducing the payment of advance tax in first two instalments. The fact that the penalty proceedings under s. 273 have been dropped gives credence to the contention on behalf of the assessee that the Assessing Officer was satisfied that the estimate filed by the assessee was not untrue to the knowledge or belief of the assessee. Considering the totality of the circumstances of the case, we are of the view of that the estimate filed by the assessee was a bona fide estimate and not an underestimate to the knowledge or belief of the assessee. Interest under s. 216 is thus unwarranted and accordingly deleted. 9. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1991 (3) TMI 199 - ITAT DELHI-B
Transfer Of Cases ... ... ... ... ..... ace, city or locality to another place in the same city or locality. As observed earlier, there being no requirement of providing any opportunity if the transfer is within the same locality, city or place, the service of transfer could not be insisted upon. The transfer of cases from one officer to another in the offices located in the same city, place or locality is no doubt an administrative order but, the assessee cannot compel the administrator to follow a course of action such as service of notice which is always linked with the providing of an opportunity, which has been clearly spelt as not necessary in the situations as is the case of the appellant, i.e., the offices being located in the same area, locality or place. Therefore, this claim of non-service of notice of transfer of his case and non providing of an opportunity of hearing is without any merit, what is not contemplated by the Act, cannot be compelled by any assessee. 4. In the result the appeal is dismissed.
-
1991 (3) TMI 198 - ITAT DELHI-B
Additional Demand, Advance Tax, Interest Payable By Government, Original Assessment, Tax Deducted At Source
-
1991 (3) TMI 197 - ITAT DELHI-A
... ...
... ... ..... our mind cannot be made the basis of reopening in the assessee s case. We would like to mention here that in the assessee s case, the book results were always accepted. No additions were ever made on the basis of estimation. The gross profit rate in the past years were accepted by the department. A perusal of that profit rate would show that whenever there was higher gross profit it was shown in the return on that basis and whenever there was low, it was shown as such, therefore, the assessee was fair enough to disclose all material facts fully and truly before the department. In view of our above discussion, we are of the opinion that the reopening of the assessment is invalid. Therefore, the order of the CIT(A) directing the ITO to make investigation and the assessment is set aside. Since we are of the opinion that the reopening itself is invalid, we do not find any necessity to discuss the merit of the additions made by the ITO. 8. The appeals of the assessee are allowed.
-
1991 (3) TMI 196 - ITAT DELHI-A
Accounting Year, Benefit Or Perquisite Arising From Business, Business Income ... ... ... ... ..... the Bonus Act and was, therefore, within the limits prescribed by the first proviso. 5. In the alternative if it is considered that bonus exceeding 8.33 was not payable under the Payment of Bonus Act then the excess amount, which has been disallowed by the assessing officer, would come up for consideration under the second proviso to section 36(1)(ii) because then the excess amount would be the amount to which the Payment of Bonus Act did not apply and if that be so, all the three conditions mentioned in the second proviso would be deemed to have been complied with because the payment has been made after arriving at an agreement between the employers and employees union and that too through the intervention of the conciliation machinery in the Labour Department of the Government of West Bengal. For the above reasons I am of the view that the CIT (A) rightly deleted the addition made by the assessing officer. Upholding his decision the appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed
-
1991 (3) TMI 195 - ITAT DELHI
Capital Loss, Investment Company, Long-term Capital Gains, Set Off, Total Income ... ... ... ... ..... transaction of sale of shares, the claim of set off of the loss against the gain, resulting in the reduction of taxes cannot be treated as a device and accordingly the claim of the appellant for set off of brought forward long term capital loss against the long term capital gain being fully justified in the circumstances of the case, the same is upheld. The consequence issue is the inclusion of the dividend income on the shares so sold, treating the same as not a sale, being improper on the facts of the case, it is deleted. 8. The issue of levy of interest, under sections 139(8) and 215 have been raised on the basis that, there had been no application of any mind and that, the assessee has the right to challenge the levy. Since the interests were levied without application of any mind, it is only proper that the assessing officer may allow an opportunity, for which this issue is set aside to the file of the assessing officer. 9. In the result, the appeals are allowed in part
-
1991 (3) TMI 194 - ITAT COCHIN
... ...
... ... ..... e building which he had arrived at Rs. 8,23,700, the cost of the building at the time of the transfer could be estimated as a proportion. But then it is only an estimate. Even if the valuer s formula is adopted the cost of the pre-existing structure would amount to Rs. 5,48,000 leaving a balance of Rs. 2,75,000 to be explained. Out of this, the assessee had declared Rs. 1,44,834 as its investment. The balance of the investment even according to the valuer would come to Rs. 1,31,000. This difference, it should be remembered, is also based on estimate. The construction was spread over a period of three years and, therefore, we hold that the addition of Rs. 3 lakhs as sustained by the first appellate authority is very excessive and in the facts and circumstances of the case, we maintain a token addition of Rs. 25,000. 16. The last point in dispute is about investment allowance which is not pressed before us and as such dismissed. 17. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed.
-
1991 (3) TMI 193 - ITAT COCHIN
... ...
... ... ..... rent set of facts. 21. In view of the foregoing therefore, we decline to interfere in the matter. In the result, the departmental appeal is dismissed. 22. ITA No. 75/Coch/1989 The only question that arises for consideration in this appeal is whether the subsidy received by the assessee from the Government should to taken into account for purposes of calculating the depreciation allowance admissible to the assessee. 23. The Assessing Officer took the line that the subsidy would go to reduce the cost to the assessee of the plant and machinery in question and that depreciation would be available only on the reduced cost. On his part, the CIT(A) held to the contrary. 24. We find that this matter stands decided, against the department, by the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Relish Foods (1989) 78 CTR (Ker) 197 (1989) 180 ITR 454 (Ker). We, therefore, decline to interfere in the matter. 25. In the result, this departmental appeal is also dismissed.
-
1991 (3) TMI 192 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... t charged under ss. 139(8) and 217. It is seen, on perusal of the learned CIT(A) s finding on ground No. 3 before him, that the interest was deleted for asst. yrs. 1978-79, 1983-84 and 1984-85, by following the ratio laid down by the Hon ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Smt. Kamla Vati vs. CIT reported in (1978) 111 ITR 248 (P and H) and the finding of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in the case of Satish Kumar, in ITA Nos. 406 and 407/Chandi/88, as the assessments for these years were framed after operating s. 148. We thus onthis ground for above three years, i.e. 1978-79, 1983-84 and 1984-85, see no merit. 6A. For asst. yr. 1985-86, the learned CIT(A) has allowed only consequential relief. Nothing was pointed out before us on behalf of the Revenue as to how the consequential relief could be denied to the assessee, if some relief is conceded in the quantum. For this year also, there is no justification to interfere. 7. In the result, the appeals are dismissed.
-
1991 (3) TMI 191 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
A Firm, A Partner, Accounting Year, Beneficiaries Unknown, Discretionary Trust ... ... ... ... ..... of income accruing and arising will thus relate to excess value of shares and should accordingly be considered for application of provisions of section 64 of the Income-tax Act in the case of the settler. This in fact has been put on concession Also by the learned counsel for the assessee. The grounds (3-6) relating to this issue are, therefore, allowed protanto. 23. Before closing, it appears appropriate to place on record with appreciation the able assistance to the Court rendered by the learned counsel from both the sides and in particular the finally articulated contentions of the learned Senior Departmental Representative Sh. Arun Kumar about the taxability of income in the hands of the trust. 24. All authorities cited from both sides have been perused and, if these are not discussed in detail, it is because these are distinguishable on facts and/or are not directly relevant. 25. In the result, I.T.A. No. 870/87 is allowed in full and I.T.A. No. 659/87 is allowed in part
-
1991 (3) TMI 190 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
Assessing Officer, Orders Prejudicial To Interests, Show-cause Notice ... ... ... ... ..... al justice. We do not know the reasons why the Commissioner made the order before he received a response to the show-cause notice from the assessee issued on 26-3-1987. The notice issued on 26-3-1987 was to give an opportunity of hearing to the assessee on 30-3-1987. Even if very expeditious postal transit from Patiala to Shimla be considered, notice dated 26-3-1987 asking the assessee to be before the Commissioner in Iyakar Bhavan at Patiala was not in accordance with the principles of natural justice. We do not go further on this because this notice was not served on the assessee before the order was made by the Commissioner. 12. Thus when we see the facts of the case from any angle, we find that the Commissioner did not assume lawful jurisdiction under section 263 to make the impugned order. Therefore, we do not consider it necessary to go into the merits of the issues involved as the order is null and void. It is cancelled as such. 13. In the result, the appeal is allowed
-
1991 (3) TMI 189 - ITAT CALCUTTA-E
... ...
... ... ..... nil. The timber sold was different from timber or alleged trees acquired on 15th March, 1978. Timber sold was grown between 1978 and 1984. At any rate, timber was different in quality from the timber acquired in the year 1978. The above aspects of the matter were properly taken into account by lower authorities and cost of acquisition was taken at nil. We cannot determine the above matter in proceeding under s. 254(2) of the IT Act. All the same it is clear that mistake, if any, was committed by the Assessing Officer and CIT(A) in taking cost of acquisition at nil. The Assessing Officer now cannot turn around and say that cost of acquisition was wrongly taken at nil in the assessment order and same now be permitted to be apportioned on the basis of purchase deed. In our view, the case does not fall under s. 254(2) of IT Act and Tribunal did not commit any mistake which could be rectified under the above provisions. 6. In the result, the miscellaneous application is rejected.
-
1991 (3) TMI 188 - ITAT BOMBAY-C
... ...
... ... ..... ar as the appeal for the asst. yr. 1983-84 is concerned, this is also an appeal against the order of the CWT(A) confirming penalty under s. 18 (1)(c) of the WT Act under similar circumstances as have been discussed and narrated for the asst. yr. 1982-83. For this year, the return of net wealth was filed on 11th April, 1985. An addition of Rs. 51,49,468 was made to the assessee s declared wealth on account of under valuation of stock and the WTO levied penalty of Rs. 2.76,400, which was confirmed by the CWT(A). All that has been stated above applies with equal force for this year also. As has been observed by the CWT(A), the arguments of the assessee for this year are the same as were for the earlier assessment year and for the reasons given in the preceding paragraphs, we would confirm the order of the CWT(A) for the asst. yr. 1983-84. 13. In the result, the Departmental appeal with be treated as allowed for statistical purposes and the appeals of the assessee are dismissed.
-
1991 (3) TMI 187 - ITAT BOMBAY-A
Cash Credits, Total Income ... ... ... ... ..... uld not make any difference insofar as the main provisions of section 271(1)(c) are concerned. Respectfully following the aforesaid judgment of the Calcutta High Court, we hold that the capitalisation by the assessee of the amount as on 1-4-1983 would have no relevance in determining as to whether the assessee had concealed the particulars of income, or furnished inaccurate particulars thereof. It would amount to an extraneous consideration. Besides, it would be a matter for consideration in the year when the amount was introduced, or utilised by the assessee and so far as the years under consideration are concerned, it would have no effect as aforesaid, and it would not be a relevant consideration in determining the conceal ment or of furnishing of inaccurate particulars thereof by him. 17. In the result, the penalties levied and sustained by the revenue authorities for the years under consideration under section 271(1)(c) of the Act are cancelled and the appeals are allowed
-
1991 (3) TMI 186 - ITAT ALLAHABAD-B
... ...
... ... ..... ken care of, further addition of these cash credits standing in the names of the partners will take the profits to astronomical figures and can by no stretch of imagination be held to be the income of the firm. We, therefore, taking the above two decisions of the Hon ble Allahabad High Court and of the Patna High Court and also of the decision of the Tribunal of Delhi Bench, are of the opinion that these cash credits have been fully explained by the assessee as they stood in the name of the partners and they by filing their confirmations have further substantiated the allegation of the assessee that these amounts were not of the firm but belonged to the individual partners. Under these circumstances, the addition of the said amounts although in part was not justified in the eyes of law and the said addition confirmed by the learned CIT(A) is set aside and the ITO is directed to delete the said addition. The issue is decided accordingly. 8. As a result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1991 (3) TMI 185 - ITAT ALLAHABAD-B
Assessing Officer, Assessment Proceedings, Compulsory Audit, High Court, Time Limit For Completion, Writ Petition
-
1991 (3) TMI 184 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-C
... ...
... ... ..... d in the present appeal in view of the aforesaid two decisions of the Tribunal. 4. The learned Departmental Representative on the other hand, strongly supported the order of the CIT contending in the process that the depreciation at the rate of 10 per cent was justified in accordance with the provisions of law. 5. We have examined the rival submissions and in our opinion the assessee must succeed in its appeal in view of the two decisions rendered by the Ahmedabad and Jaipur Benches of the Tribunal. It has been held in these decisions that a diesel generating set would fall for consideration under Entry 10-A (xiii) and accordingly be entitled to depreciation at the rate of 30 per cent. The claim before us, however, is not for that figure but is being restricted to 15 per cent. On the facts and circumstances of the case, we accept the same confirming thereby the order passed by the IAC(A) and setting aside the order passed by the CIT(A) under s. 263. 6. The appeal is allowed.
-
1991 (3) TMI 183 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-C
Accounting Year, Additional Depreciation, Advance Tax, Bona Fide, Business Expenditure, Carrying On Business, Investment Allowance, Plant And Machinery, Sales Tax Act, Sales Tax Liability
-
1991 (3) TMI 182 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-C
Business Income ... ... ... ... ..... n ex-cases where the same business is being carried on. Where income is derived by the exploitation of the asset and there is only a difference in the manner of exploitation, that is to say, instead of user of the assets by the assessee itself there is a leasing out of the assets, the income derived must be considered to be of the same nature i.e., business income and also income of the same business. We are supported in this view of the matter by the decision of Calcutta High Court in Premchand Jute Mills Ltd. s case. It has been held in said decision that in such cases unabsorbed depreciation and loss incurred when the asset was exploited by the assessee himself can be carried forward and set off against the income derived from leasing out of the commercial asset. The CIT(A) was justified in giving directions of that nature to the Assessing Officer. The grounds raised by the Department are rejected. 10 to 14. These paras are not reproduced here as they involve minor issues
-
1991 (3) TMI 181 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-C
Carrying On Business, Discretionary Trust, Income From Property, Minor Child, Religious Trust
............
|
