|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 161 to 180 of 286 Records
-
1991 (9) TMI 126 - ITAT DELHI-E
Assessing Officer, Orders Prejudicial To Interests, Original Assessment ... ... ... ... ..... cases which bring prejudice to the revenue administration. The section, according to the Learned Judges, is not necessarily meant to sheer escapement of revenue. 22. Applying the law laid down by their Lordships of the Madras High Court in Venkatakrishna Rice Co. s case, the order of the Assessing Officer in our considered opinion is erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of revenue. It was not necessary for the Commissioner to demonstrate as to how much revenue must have been lost by the inaction of the Assessing Officer by making an assessment in undue haste and hurry. The Commissioner has sufficiently demonstrated in his order as to how the order passed by the Assessing Officer on the facts and in the circumstances of this case was prejudicial to the interests of revenue administration. We thus have no hesitation to uphold the order of the Commissioner passed under section 263 and reject the appeal of the assessee. 23. In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed
-
1991 (9) TMI 125 - ITAT DELHI-E
Investment Allowance ... ... ... ... ..... long with article, it has to derive its character from the word article and cannot include within its scope immovable properties like buildings and dams. Then sub-clause (iii) also refers to articles or things specified in the list in the 11th Schedule. A perusal of the 11th Schedule would show that the articles and things referred therein are all movable things like drinks, tobacco, cosmetics, machines, furniture etc. Therefore, the 11th Schedule also indicates that the words article or thing used in section 32A refer only to movable goods and not to immovable objects like buildings in the construction of which the assessee is engaged as a contractor. For the above reasons we hold that the assessee, who is merely engaged in the business of raising buildings as a civil contractor, is not entitled to investment allowance under section 32A of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The CIT (Appeals) s direction to the contrary is, therefore, erroneous and is hereby vacated. 6. Appeal allowed
-
1991 (9) TMI 124 - ITAT DELHI-D
Assessing Officer, Sales Promotion Expenses, Trading Receipt ... ... ... ... ..... see has tried to present it on a reduced scale. While the Legislature intended to curb the extravagance of such expenditure, the expenditure in fact has considerably gone up with the result that the assessee had to employ a device to show as if the expenditure has gone down from Rs. 40,46,145 in the immediately preceding year to Rs. 8,27,465 in the year under consideration. 19. We also do not appreciate the argument of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that though the net profit earned is only Rs. 3,76,760, the assessee will be saddled with a huge liability if the entire amount of Rs. 52,34,829 were considered as covered by section 37(3A) of the Act. In this connection, we would only say that if an assessee chooses to circumvent the law and plays with fire, it cannot complain of burnt fingers later on. 20. Taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances of the case, we uphold the order of the CIT (Appeals) in this regard. 21. In the result, the appeal is dismissed
-
1991 (9) TMI 123 - ITAT DELHI-D
Advance Tax, Assessing Officer, Late Filing, Reasonable Cause, Regular Assessment ... ... ... ... ..... ounsel for the assessee on the Karnataka High Court decision in the case of Bangalore Animal Food Corpn. Ltd. is also well-placed. In that case, it was hold that delayed payment of advance tax did not lose its character as an advance payment. Similarly, the Rajasthan High Court in the case of Jaipur Udyog Ltd. has hold that the amount of Rs. 11,00,000 directed to be paid as advance tax by the Supreme Court in November, 1965 i.e., after the expiry of the financial year retained the character of advance tax payment. 12. In view of the above discussion, we hold that the assessee was entitled to get credit for the additional amount of Rs. 14,75,000 paid towards advance tax for the purpose of calculation of penalty under section 271(1)(a) of the Act. The Assessing Officer is, therefore, directed to calculate the penalty 20 on the amount of assessed tax after reducing a sum of Rs. 36,90,000 including Rs. 14,75,000 paid as advance tax. 13. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed
-
1991 (9) TMI 122 - ITAT DELHI-C
Annual Letting Value, Annual Value, Assessing Officer, House Property, Income From Property, Let Out, Tax Proceedings
-
1991 (9) TMI 121 - ITAT DELHI-B
... ...
... ... ..... the assessee had effected bona fide change in the method of accounting. What flows from this is, can it be said that the system of accounting adopted in the first two assessment years was the method regularly followed by the assessee? Moreover, when the assessee had specifically requested the Assessing Officer on 18th Sept., 1982 for permission to change the method of accounting, though this was not legally required, yet in the absence of any intimation from the Assessing Officer, the assessee could reasonably form a view that no objection would be raised at the time of assessment with regard to the change effected by the assessee. We, therefore, set aside the appellate order and direct the Assessing Officer to revise the assessment accepting the claim of the assessee for change in the method of accounting. For this purpose, if necessary, reasonable opportunity be given to the assessee for the purpose of correct computation of income. 7. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1991 (9) TMI 120 - ITAT DELHI-B
Valuation Of Assets, Hatchery ... ... ... ... ..... tax liability, there is a debt owed by the assessee on the valuation date, even though such determination may be self-sufficient in point of time to the valuation date. Respectfully following the law laid down by the Supreme Court, we uphold the orders of the Commissioner of Wealth-tax (Appeals) on this issue. At the time of hearing of these appeals, the learned representative for the revenue urged that as the figures mentioned in the orders of the Commissioner of Wealth-tax were not correct and required to be ascertained as a consequence of further proceedings, an appropriate direction be given so that the correct amount as ascertained may be allowed as a deduction. We agree with this submission and while upholding the orders of the Commissioner of Wealth-tax on this issue, we direct the Wealth-tax Officer to ascertain correct figures of liability and allow the necessary deduction and modify the assessments accordingly. 17. In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed.
-
1991 (9) TMI 119 - ITAT DELHI-B
... ...
... ... ..... a coparcener could not dispose of his share by will. In case the wife or any other female members had any rights in the property of such coparcener by virtue of their alleged right to maintenance or otherwise, section 30 would certainly have placed some restriction on the disposal of the property by the deceased to protect that right of the female members. It is because the female members have no such specific right in the property of the deceased that section 30 gives absolute right of disposal by will to a coparcener. 18. In view of the above discussion we hold that on the death of the deceased R. Satakopan, his entire share in the aforesaid immovable property, which was half share, passed on his death within the meaning of section 6 of the Estate Duty Act and that this issue was not correctly decided by this Tribunal in the Income-tax appeal of Murli Manohar. We, therefore, find no merit in this appeal and affirming the orders of the authorities below, we dismiss the same.
-
1991 (9) TMI 118 - ITAT DELHI-A
Agricultural Income, Assessing Officer, Undisclosed Sources ... ... ... ... ..... e. Under the Income-tax Act if assessee is found to have invested money for the source of which no satisfactory explanation is furnished, the Assessing Officer is empowered to treat the investment as income from undisclosed sources. However, in order to invoke such provisions of law there must be evidence to show that investment/expenditure has been incurred. Assessee s obligation to satisfactorily explain the source of investment/expenditure arises only when the revenue has discharged the onus of establishing that such investment/expenditure has been made. In this case, Assessing Officer has estimated the expenditure and and on the basis of an estimate the deeming provisions could not be pressed into service. 14. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the Assessing Officer was justified in assessing the income of Rs. 28,197 in the case of each of the assessee as income from undisclosed sources. 15. The appeals of the assessee are allowed
-
1991 (9) TMI 117 - ITAT COCHIN
Appeal Against Assessment, Cash Credits ... ... ... ... ..... the Income-tax Officer by his admissions and explanations that he had moneys left over with him in the past and mistakes had occurred in his books of account. If the Assessing Officer did not choose to reopen the assessment on the basis of such admissions, all that we can say is that the difficulties faced by the revenue are only at its own invitation. It may be that the Income-tax Officer did not proceed to initiate reassessment proceedings as the assessee had agreed for the assessment of the entire amount in the year under appeal. This agreement was on the condition that no penalty proceedings would be initiated against him as is evident from the letters of the assessee dated 15-12-1979 and subsequent letters. Thus, both the assessee and the Assessing Officer have acted on an understanding of the situation and, therefore, there cannot be any levy of penalty on an agreed assessment. For all these reasons, we cancel the penalty levied. 6. In the result, the appeal is allowed
-
1991 (9) TMI 116 - ITAT COCHIN
Closing Stock, Previous Year ... ... ... ... ..... second method referred to in para 16 supra. At our instance, the trading account of the assessee for the year of account ending on 14-5-1976, 15-5-1977, 15-5-1978 and 15-5-1979 were recast on the lines indicated above. The accounts thus recast revealed that as far as the gross profit was concerned there was no variation at all. And this is not surprising. 20. As we see it, the ITO misdirected himself when he thought that the debit of Rs. 96,840 to the P and L A/c represented the cost of 9000 tins actually purchased by the assessee during that year of account. The factual position, however, is different, and that is that the assessee was carrying out final adjustment that was required to be made. We are satisfied that as respects the assessment year now before us there is no leakage of income, consequent on the method of accounting followed in this regard by the assessee. We, therefore, decline to interfere in the matter. 21. In the result, the departmental appeal is dismissed
-
1991 (9) TMI 115 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... ificatory nor has it been inserted out of abundant caution. Regular assessment in s. 215 means only the first order of regular assessment and not the last operative order or a regular assessment at any given point of time. To our mind, the combined reading of these judgments indicates that first, there must be an order for charging interest under s. 215 in the regular assessment and interest can, on the law as enunciated in these judgments, be charged on the total income in the regular assessment order. In the case before us even in the order under s. 154 there is no direction for charging of interest under s. 215. Charging of interest under s. 154 to our mind may not be justified on the total income determined in this order in view of the Hon ble Punjab and Haryana High Court judgment in the case of Oswal Woollen Mills. Therefore, charging of interest in these cases was not, in our opinion, justified. Interest charged is, therefore, deleted in each case. 5. Appeals allowed.
-
1991 (9) TMI 114 - ITAT CALCUTTA-D
A Partner, Accounting Year, Partnership Deed ... ... ... ... ..... e. At the same time we find that the CBDT s Circular cited by the assessee s counsel and the decision of the Hon ble Calcutta High Court relied on by him are relevant to the issue and support the arguments advanced by the assessee s counsel as well as for admission of fresh evidence by us. Hence it is considered necessary that the documents being an affidavit and a certificate as stated above produced and filed before us, not being produced before the Assessing Officer and the Learned CIT(A) need proper scrutiny and evaluation by the Assessing Officer. For the above purpose the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is set aside and the issue is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to examine the aforesaid documents by giving an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and to pass a fresh order in accordance with law. 15. In the result, the appeal by the revenue is dismissed and the appeal by the assessee may be treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes.
-
1991 (9) TMI 113 - ITAT CALCUTTA-C
... ...
... ... ..... by the ITO and, hence, the CIT(A) order to extent of confirming only modification of the quantum of interest charged in the instant case is highly unjustified. 8. The learned Departmental Representative, on the other hand, relied on the order of the CIT(A). 9. We have considered both the submissions and find from the grounds of appeal before the CIT(A) that the assessee has challenged the chargeability of the interest under to pay any interest under s. 215. The CIT(A) has not given any finding on this issue. He has only given the finding that the interest charged under s. 215, will get modified automatically on the basis of reduced tax as a result of appellate order. Since the CIT(A) has not given his finding on this issue, we remit this point to the CIT(A) who should give specific finding whether interest under s. 215 is leviable or not. This finding should be given, after affording reasonable opportunity to the assessee. 10. In the result, the assessee s appeal is allowed.
-
1991 (9) TMI 112 - ITAT CALCUTTA-C
Assessing Officer, Sales Promotion Expenses, Trading Receipt ... ... ... ... ..... udicial precedents. If the co-ordinate Benches of the Tribunal cannot overrule the earlier decision, it is impossible to hold that a CIT(A) who is of equal and same rank and is not vested with specific jurisdiction can adjudicate on the validity of the order of the Commissioner under section 263. In that view of the matter we hold that the learned CIT(A) has got no jurisdiction and his order is accordingly set aside. 10. This disposes of the additional ground filed by the revenue contending that without prejudice to (1), (2) and (3) above the learned CIT(A) erred both in facts and in deciding the justifiability of initiation of proceedings under section 263 by the Commissioner of Income-tax and in that view annulling the assessment made by the ITO as per direction of the Commissioner contained in this order under section 263 of the Income-tax Act. 11. In the result, the appeal is restored to the file of the CIT(A) with the direction that he will dispose of the appeal on merit
-
1991 (9) TMI 111 - ITAT CALCUTTA-C
Backward Area, Dispose Of, S. 10, The High Court, Writ Petition ... ... ... ... ..... Industries Ltd. v. CIT 1971 82 ITR 835 (SC) that income accrues when it falls due , that is to say, when it becomes legally recoverable irrespective of whether it is actually received or not and accrued income is that income which the assessee has a legal right to receive. 8. So, in view of these pronouncements, we hold in the case before us that as the Government of West Bengal has filed an appeal before the division Bench against the judgment in civil rule No. 4289(W) of 1980 and which is still pending the amount of Rs. 10 lakhs cannot be brought to tax in the assessment year 1981-82. In the result, we confirm the finding of the CIT(A) on this point. The other issues raised in this appeal regarding nature of receipt and taxability under section 41(1) are not considered on merits by us as they will be decided when the assessing officer makes a regular assessment in the appropriate year regarding the taxability of Rs. 10 lakhs. 9. In the result, the departmental appeal fails
-
1991 (9) TMI 110 - ITAT CALCUTTA-B
Interest Payable By Assessee, Total Income ... ... ... ... ..... nt of the tax paid by the sterling company against the tax due from the assessee-company, as could be seen from the letter dated 17-81988 written by the Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Comp. Circle 9(5), Calcutta to the assessee - company at page 20 of the paper book. We are, therefore, satisfied that there is no merit in the objection raised by the appellant in the present appeal against the order of the CIT(A) holding that no appeal would lie against the interest charged under section 220(2) of the Act. We agree with the CIT(A) in his reasoning and conclusion and we are of the view that the assessee is knocking at the wrong door and not pursuing the remedy open to it which it has already pursued by its petition dated 23-11-1987. In this view of the matter, it is unnecessary to consider the assessee s further objection stated to have been taken by means of an additional ground before us. 4. In the result, the order of the CIT(A) is confirmed and the appeal is dismissed
-
1991 (9) TMI 109 - ITAT CALCUTTA-A
... ...
... ... ..... ing heard. 14. Now we take up the departmental appeal. The main ground relates to computation of deduction under s. 80-O of the Act. The deduction is to be computed as per our directions given in the assessee s appeal. We direct accordingly. 15. Regarding deduction of sum of Rs. 3,79,458 which was remitted by the assessee from Malaysia to Japan both the parties before us agreed that the question is to be examined with reference to definition of convertible foreign exchange provided by Explanation to s. 80N of the Act. It was further agreed that the matter was not examined by the lower authorities in accordance with the aforesaid Explanation. This may now be done. Accordingly the order of the CIT(A) on this point is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh determination after allowing the assessee an opportunity of being heard. We direct accordingly. 16. In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed in the terms indicated above.
-
1991 (9) TMI 108 - ITAT CALCUTTA
Advertisement Expenditure, Advertisement, Publicity And Sales Promotion, Assessing Officer, Business Expenditure, Capital Expenditure, Commission Payment, Expenditure Incurred, Orders Prejudicial To Interests
-
1991 (9) TMI 107 - ITAT BOMBAY-D
Rate Purpose ... ... ... ... ..... ITO to tax the income of the trust in its hands as a unit or in the hands of the beneficiaries on their respective shares. The only change made is that if the trust has a business income also, then the whole of the income of the trust would be taxed at the maximum marginal rate. Since in the instant case, the whole of the income of the trust has been taxed at the maximum marginal rate in the hands of the trust, as a unit, there is no question of including the share of the assessee in the trust income, in the total income of the assessee even for rate purposes. In this view of the matter, we would uphold the order of the DC (Appeals) for the assessment year 1985-86 and direct the AC (IT) not to include the assessee s share in the income of the Trust for rate purposes in respect of the assessment year 1987-88. 10. In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue for the assessment year 1985-86 is dismissed and that filed by the assessee for the assessment year 1987-88 is allowed
............
|
