|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 121 to 140 of 240 Records
-
1993 (1) TMI 139 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Project imports - “Industrial plant” ... ... ... ... ..... s . By judgment dated 2nd April, 1992, the contentions raised by the petitioners herein have been fully considered and negatived by the Division Bench. With respect, I concur with the reasoning of the Division Bench in that judgment. 41. Yet another judgment of the same Court by the same Division Bench is reported in Lazor Colour Prints Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India 1992 (62) E.L.T. 703 . The Division Bench rejected the contention that the doctrine of promissory estoppel would apply and also held that the Project Import Regulations are not in any way impaired or affected by the power of exemption granted under Section 25 of the Customs Act to the Government. 42. Both the rulings of the Bombay High Court are.......................of the petitioners herein and I agree with the reasoning of the Division Bench in the two rulings. 43. In the result, the writ petitions have to fail and they are dismissed. On the facts and circumstances of the case, there will be no order as to costs.
-
1993 (1) TMI 138 - ITAT PUNE
... ...
... ... ..... Rs. 1,000. Before the Asstt. Controller the accountable person claimed that petty bills to the extent of Rs. 1,000 in respect of newspapers, grocery, house-hold and sundry expenses as a liability. The Asstt. Controller rejected the claim for want of bills to show that they were outstanding on the date of death of the deceased. 32. On appeal, the Appellate Controller confirmed the action of the Asstt. CED. 33. At the time of hearing, no specific argument has been advanced by the learned counsel for the accountable person in this regard nor any evidence has been produced. No further light has been thrown as to the exact nature of the liability claimed. The burden of proving the liability lies on the accountable person and inasmuch as it has not been discharged, we have no other alternative except confirming the decision of the Appellate CED on this point. Accordingly, the decision of the Appellate CED is confirmed on this point. 34. In the result, the appeal is allowed partly.
-
1993 (1) TMI 135 - ITAT PUNE
Fixed Deposit ... ... ... ... ..... imed that petty bills to the extent of Rs. 1000 in respect of newspapers, grocery, household and sundry expenses as a liability. The Asstt. Controller rejected the claim for want of bills to show that they were outstanding on the date of death of the deceased. 32. On appeal, the Appellate Controller confirmed the action of the Asstt. Controller of Estate Duty. 33. At the time of hearing, no specific argument has been advanced by the learned counsel for the accountable person in this regard nor any evidence has been produced. No any further light has been thrown as to the exact nature of the liability claimed. The burden of proving the liability lies on the accountable person and inasmuch as it has not been discharged, we have no other alternative except confirming the decision of the Appellate Controller of Estate Duty on this point. Accordingly, the decision of the Appellate Controller of Estate Duty is confirmed on this point. 34. In the result, the appeal is allowed partly
-
1993 (1) TMI 132 - ITAT PATNA
... ...
... ... ..... e in the cash book but no such entry was found. If the cash was held by the assessee in trust for the Sangh, then after recording the receipt of cash in the books of the Sangh there could have been corresponding entry for payment of the cash to the assessee, who alleged that the cash was held by him in trust. Therefore, the explanation of the assessee regarding source of the cash cannot be accepted. In this view of the matter it has to be held that the admission of the assessee was not partly relied upon but was fully relied upon. Once I have recorded a finding that the statement of the assessee was fully relied upon then there does not remain any dispute on the point regarding inclusion of the amount of the cash in the assessment of the assessee. I would, therefore, agree with the view expressed by the learned Accountant Member and the view is against the assessee. 5. The matter will now go before the Division Bench for appropriate order in accordance with the majority view.
-
1993 (1) TMI 130 - ITAT PATNA
A Firm, A Partner, Assessing Officer, Deduction Of Interest, Firm Assessment, Interest Payable, Partner's Share In Income Of Firm
-
1993 (1) TMI 128 - ITAT MADRAS-D
... ...
... ... ..... he Revenue cannot dispute the fact that these debts have been incurred in relation to the said assets as they are intricately connected with the assets which are chargeable to tax according to the Revenue. Therefore, if the buildings were taxable as claimed by the Revenue, the liabilities would have to be deducted. The other objection of the Revenue is that the Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in granting a further deduction for appurtenant land and for restricted marketability due to lack of vacant possession. We find that the Commissioner (Appeals) has only followed the decision of the Madras High Court in the case of Raja D. V. Seetharamayya Bahadur v. CGT 1988 173 ITR 366 and hence we see no reason to interfere with this view of the Commissioner (Appeals). In any case, these issues are academic in as much as according to us, the property itself is not chargeable to tax. 10. In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed
-
1993 (1) TMI 126 - ITAT MADRAS-C
Assessing Officer, Assessment Proceedings, Bona Fide, Business Income, Capital Gains, Change In Method Of Valuation Of Stock, Closing Stock, Income Returned, Interest On Borrowed Capital, Interest Payable, Mercantile System, Per Annum, Right To Receive, Sale Proceeds, Tax Liability, The High Court
-
1993 (1) TMI 124 - ITAT JAIPUR
... ...
... ... ..... re, the matter was sub judice. It was thus submitted that in the facts of the case the appeal deserves to be dismissed. 5. I am, however, of the opinion that it is quite evident from the record placed before me that the assessee had been accounting for the exchange rate difference on cash basis and the Department had also been allowing the same to it on that basis and the CIT(A) in first appeal for asst. yr. 1983-84 and the Tribunal in second appeal for 1982-83 had accepted such position. The contention of the assessee was quite reasonable and must have been accepted. Though certain decisions were also cited by Shri Gargieya in support of his contention yet I find that the facts being quite clear, the scale of justice tilts in favour of the assessee. I, therefore, direct that the exchange rate difference of Rs. 57,669 be allowed to the assessee in the year under consideration and the assessment order be modified by the ITO accordingly. 6. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1993 (1) TMI 122 - ITAT JAIPUR
... ...
... ... ..... of accounting and that the cash system of accounting was only in respect of his professional fees. He further argued that he had been returning his income at more than Rs. 1 lac for this year so also for the subsequent three years and, hence, it would not make much difference for him if the income was assessed in one year or in three years. He further pointed out that he had filed written submissions both before the learned ITO as well as before the learned CIT(A) but they had not been able to give any satisfactory reasons why his arguments were not being accepted and both of them have failed to pass speaking orders. 4. We have carefully considered the arguments of Shri Dani. We are of the opinion that looking to the particular facts and circumstances of this case and the fact that the authorities below have not been able to meet the objections of the assessee in this case, the claim of the assessee may be allowed. 5. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.
-
1993 (1) TMI 120 - ITAT JAIPUR
Industrial Undertaking, Profits And Gains ... ... ... ... ..... ssessee, the Assessing Officer shall not be empowered to reject his claim under section 80-I because he had allowed it in the first year. In our view it is clear that this could neither be intention of the Legislature nor can it be covered from the language and the scheme of the IT Act. We, therefore, hold that since in this particular case the lower authorities have held it as a fact, which fact has not been challenged before us by the assessee, that the assessee had substantially employed ten or less persons during the assessment year under consideration, merely because it had been allowed deduction under section 80-I in the first year, it cannot entitle the assessee to get that benefit if it fails to comply with the requirements given in clause (iv) of sub-section (2) of section 80-I of the IT Act in a subsequent year for which the assessment is being made. 3. Accordingly, we allow the appeal filed by the Revenue and uphold the order of the Assessing Officer on this point.
-
1993 (1) TMI 119 - ITAT JABALPUR
... ...
... ... ..... ad sold between 1925 to 1976 in piecemeal. The HUF had also income from money lending. The statement of total income of Dr. D.K. Jain for the asst. yr. 1976-77 filed before the ITO, Delhi, also gives details of his assets duly disclosing his balance of Rs. 40,000 with Shri Kanhaiyalal. Dr. D.K. Jain had received Rs. 35,000 on 6th June, 1974 at the time of partial partition which he had kept with his father, Shri Kanhaiyalal. The assessment in the case of Dr. D.K. Jain stood completed on 30th Nov., 1976 which is much before the date of search. A subsequent balance sheet for the asst. yr. 1977-78 also disclosed deposit of Rs. 50,000 with Shri Kanhaiyalal. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the learned CIT(A) took the correct view in holding that there existed assessee-HUF as on 6th June, 1974 when a partial partition was effected between various members of the family, dividing cash and other assets. In the circumstances, we find no merit in this appeal and dismiss the same.
-
1993 (1) TMI 118 - ITAT JABALPUR
... ...
... ... ..... ja Jaiswal was that of a wholesale merchant in Indian made foreign liquor, whereas the present assessee was a retailer. In this view of the matter, net profit rate of 3.25 is just and proper. The net profit thus comes to Rs. 53,914. The net profit adopted by the Assessing Officer at Rs. 1,65,144 is, therefore, substituted to Rs. 53,914. The assessee gets relief of Rs. 1,11,230. 7. The plea of the assessee that the revised return was filed by him under the amnesty scheme is not maintainable. Simply because any return or revised return of income is claimed as filed under the amnesty scheme, it does not ipso facto become under the amnesty scheme. One of the requisite conditions for filing the return under the amnesty scheme is that there should be full and true disclosure of the income. That was not done by the assessee. The revised return, therefore, cannot be taken as filed under the amnesty scheme. 8. In the result, all the appeals and the cross objections are partly allowed.
-
1993 (1) TMI 117 - ITAT GAUHATI
Central Government, Special Allowance ... ... ... ... ..... e it can unhesitantly be held that the SDA granted to the assessee is not a casual or a non-recurring receipt to get exemption as provided under sub-clause (3) of section 10 of the IT Act, 1961. In our view it is also not in the nature of compensatory allowance as per Rule 9(5) of Fundamental Rules. The notification No. SO 144(E) dated 21-12-1989 also cannot come to the rescue of the assessee. 9. We, therefore, held that the Special (Duty) Allowance granted to the assessee is an income and in the absence of any notification by the Central Government published in the Official Gazette under section 10(14) of the Act is not exempt and has to be considered as salary and, therefore, liable to tax under the IT Act, 1961. The conclusion of the DCIT(Appeals), in our view is therefore, erroneous and not sustainable. We therefore reverse the finding and conclusion of the DCIT(Appeals) and upheld the order of the Assessing Officer. 10. In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is allowed
-
1993 (1) TMI 116 - ITAT DELHI-E
... ...
... ... ..... ely, the cash book. Therefore, it is difficult, in fact unsafe also, to treat this addition though confirmed by the Tribunal, as the concealed income of the assessee within the meaning of s. 271(1)(c) and the Explanation added thereto. Here it appears to us to be a mis-judgment made by the Department obsessed by the feeling that the lack of entry for travelling expenditure would, as a matter of course, lead to the conclusion that the money was not available for being sent to Bombay and that the money introduced in the Bombay books had come out of some undisclosed sources. Thus, none of the additions made by the Department justify the conclusion that the assessee was guilty of concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars in respect of those additions. The conclusion drawn by the authorities below does not appear to us to be justified, warranted and sound. We therefore accept the assessee s appeal and delete the penalty. 7. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1993 (1) TMI 115 - ITAT DELHI-B
Capital Gains, House Property, Profit On Sale ... ... ... ... ..... l Corpn. (P.) Ltd. 1982 133 ITR 525. In that case possession was not handed over nor any sale deed was executed. Therefore, it was held that it was not a case of sale nor relinquishment or extinguishment of the rights in the property. Therefore, that case also was on a different point. 6. Looking to the entire facts and circumstances of the case we are of the view that the assessee by virtue of the sale deed executed on19-6-1980had purchased new residential accommodation for a sum of Rs. 1,25,000 and, therefore, was entitled to get the deduction under section 54(1) of the IT Act, 1961. It was not necessary to acquire title because the said provision no--where stipulates such requirement. We find ourselves in agreement with the view of the learned counsel for the assessee and find support from the view taken by the Andhra Pradesh High Court and this Tribunal also in an earlier case. 7. In the result the appeal is accepted and the order of the AC and CIT (Appeals) are set aside
-
1993 (1) TMI 114 - ITAT DELHI-B
Bona Fide, Cash System, Mercantile System ... ... ... ... ..... d a sick unit in the year 1988, it is obvious that the financial condition of the principal is not good and, therefore, it has failed to discharge its financial obligations. It has failed to repay the institutional loss and has even defaulted in making contribution to the provident fund. 19. Looking to the entire facts and circumstances, we are of the view that the change over from the mercantile system of accounting by the assessee cannot be called to be other than bona fide. Since, the principal M/s. Jhalani Tools have become a sick unit due to heavy losses year after year, the assessee chose to change over from mercantile system to cash system of accounting. Unless there is lack of bona fides or there is a casual exercise of discretion for change over, it would not be appropriate to reject the change. In view of this, decision of the CIT(A) appears to be correct and no interference is called for. 20. In the result, the ITA No. 357/DEL/1989 filed by the revenue is dismissed
-
1993 (1) TMI 113 - ITAT DELHI-A
... ...
... ... ..... with which the Department is aggrieved. 43. After hearing both the parties, we are of the view that no modification is called for in the order passed by the CIT(A) in the absence of any material having been brought on record by the Department to enable us to take a view to the contrary. The first ground in the appeal is accordingly rejected. 44. The second ground once again pertains to the levy of interest under s. 217 in the course of reassessment proceedings. The CIT(A) followed the decision of the Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of S. Pratap Singh of Nabha in cancelling the levy. For the detailed reasons discussed by us in some of the orders pertaining to the preceding assessment years the decision of the CIT(A) in this respect is confirmed. 45. In the result, appeals for asst. yrs. 1975-76 and 1976-77 are partly allowed and appeal for asst. yr. 1977-78 is allowed, all for statistical purposes, whereas appeals for asst. yrs. 1978-79, 1979-80 and 1980-81 are dismissed.
-
1993 (1) TMI 112 - ITAT DELHI-A
... ...
... ... ..... assessee was bona fide, no penalty can be levied. The learned Departmental Representative submitted that the word bona fide has been introduced on the statute book w.e.f.10th Sept., 1986. Therefore, it cannot apply to the case pertaining to the asst. yr. 1980-81. So far as this contention is concerned, we find that the penalty was imposed by the AO on8th Jan., 1988, after this amendment was introduced on the statute book. Therefore, the law prevailing on that date, should be applied and not the law previous to that. In view of this fact, the amended provision where explanation is found bona fide, has to be taken into account in the case of the assessee because the penalty order itself was passed after the amendment was brought on the statute book. In view of this discussion, we are of the opinion that no penalty can be levied under s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. We, therefore, set aside the order of the CIT(A) and delete the penalty levided. 6. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1993 (1) TMI 111 - ITAT DELHI-A
A Partner, Cinema Building, High Court, Net Wealth, Partnership Firm, Plant And Machinery ... ... ... ... ..... as obtained injunction against eviction by the Hon ble Delhi High Court. Therefore, under these circumstances, it cannot be said that the assessee had the right to obtain fresh lease for the land or properties in question. There is nothing to show that in pursuance of the said right fresh lease has been granted by the Government in respect of land. Therefore, this right cannot be said to be an asset within the meaning of section 2(e)(2)(iii) of the Wealth-tax Act and its value was not liable to be included in the net wealth of the assessee in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of F.S. Gandhi. 11. In view of our above discussion, the appeal of the assessee succeeds on legal point. Therefore, we set aside the order of the CWT (Appeals) valuing the property under the Wealth-tax Act. The Cinema-house being plant and machinery, is not chargeable to tax as per the provisions of section 40(3) of the Finance Act, 1983 also. 12. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1993 (1) TMI 110 - ITAT DELHI-A
Business Expenditure, Carrying On Business, Closing Stock, In Part, Insurance Company, Manufacture And Sale, Raw Material, Written Down Value
............
|
