|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 141 to 160 of 285 Records
-
1993 (2) TMI 148 - ITAT JAIPUR
Computation Of Capital, Mistake Apparent From Record ... ... ... ... ..... e insertion of clause (v) in the definition of the term transfer in section 2(47). Thus the cases relied upon by the learned D/R do not afford any help to Revenue. 10. The ITO has referred to a case of Abdullah v. Bhichuk 1934 147 IC 767, purportedly laying down the proposition that the provisions of section 47 would come into operation when there is a competition between two documents relating to the same property, both of which are registered and the question of priority between them is to be determined. This case could not be (made) available to us. Prima facie such a proposition is not borne out of the language of section 47 of the Indian Registration Act, 1877 read with section 2(47)(v) of the Act. 11. To sum up we hold that it was a case of long term capital gain. We, therefore, direct the ITO to treat it as such and give benefit of section 54F of the Act to the assessee according to law at the time of giving effect to this order. 12. In the result the appeal is allowed
-
1993 (2) TMI 147 - ITAT HYDERABAD-B
Manufacture Or Processing Of Goods, Retrospective Operation, Sales Tax, Undistributed Profits
-
1993 (2) TMI 146 - ITAT HYDERABAD
Book Profits, Computation Of ... ... ... ... ..... fits of any other previous financial year or years (b) if the company has incurred any loss in any previous financial year or years, witch falls or fail after the commencement of the Companies (Amendment) Act. 1960, then, the amount of the loss or an amount which is equal to the amount provided for depreciation for that year or those years whichever is less, shall be set off against the profits of the company for the year for which dividend is proposed to be declared or paid or against the profits of the company for any previous financial year or years. arrived at in both cases after providing for depreciation in accordance with the provisions of sub section (2) or against both. (c) the Central Government may, if it thinks necessary so to do in the public interest. allow any company to declare or pay dividend for any financial year out of the profits of the company for that year or any previous financial year or years without providing for depreciation Provided further that i
-
1993 (2) TMI 145 - ITAT DELHI-E
Application By Commissioner, Assessee's Appeal, Tax Authorities ... ... ... ... ..... ch inter alia provided for a fine of Rs. 10,000 for non-compliance. We also have a statement at the bar by the learned counsel that pressure is being put on the assessee to discharge the tax dues immediately. It needs no over-emphasis to say that in matters of stay urgency should be the prime consideration of the tax authorities as well as the Tribunal since a quick decision one way or the other on the assessee s application would be beneficial and fair to both the parties. 7. In the light of the discussion in the preceding paras and on the facts of the present case, we would ask the Commissiorier to pass an order on the assessee s application dated 25-1-1993 and till such time as said order is passed the demand which is the subject matter of the present application is stayed. This order shall however stand vacated after a lapse of 7 days from the date on which the order of the Commissioner of Income tax is served on the assessee. 8. The application is disposed of accordingly
-
1993 (2) TMI 144 - ITAT DELHI-D
... ...
... ... ..... dings our task is limited and that is whether prima facie the Assessing Officer could treat export fees as part of the total turnover while working out the relief under s. 80HHC of the Act. For the reasons stated above, the issue is not free from doubt and is certainly debatable and contentious. In that view of the matter, we hold that the Assessing Officer was not justified in the first instance in making a prima facie adjustment by restricting the claim of the assessee under s. 80HHC from Rs. 6,62,74,581 to Rs. 2,30,98,470. If the Assessing Officer could not make adjustment in the intimation then it was his duty to accept the rectification application of the assessee as he had accepted in the case of another addition of Rs. 50,000 made by the Assessing Officer under s. 143(1)(a). We further hold that the first appellate authority was not justified in confirming the order of rectification passed by the Assessing Officer on this issue. 7. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1993 (2) TMI 143 - ITAT DELHI-D
A Partner, Additions To Income, Partnership Deed, Search And Seizure, Undisclosed Income ... ... ... ... ..... the finding in the earlier paragraphs, that, the conclusion arrived at by the revenue that the winning ticket was sold after the draw, was a surmise and conjecture and not based on any evidence, the addition of Rs. 2,09,000 can no longer survive, hence deleted. 36. The issues relating to the disallowance out of entertaintment expenses and sundry expenses, have not been insisted upon, during the hearing, hence are treated as dismissed. 37. In the appeal of the individual, the disallowances out of the accounts with Swastic Lottery Agency and New Vijay Agency, were not insisted upon, hence are treated as dismissed. The issue of levy of interest under sections 139(8) and 217 of the Act, are stated to be consequential, and hence, we only direct the Assessing Officer to recalculate the interest, while giving effect to this order. 38. In the result the quantum appeals of the firm and of the individual, are allowed in part and the appeal against the refusal of registration, dismissed
-
1993 (2) TMI 142 - ITAT DELHI-C
... ...
... ... ..... mber Bench for the asst. yr. 1982-83. In view of the decision of the Hon ble High Court which refers to various disputes amongst themselves, the matter requires reconsideration afresh and for that matter the decision of Delhi High Court in the case of the assessee pronounced on12th Aug., 1987though was available to the assessee but could not be filed, would certainly throw a light. Therefore, this decision would enable any Court to render substantial justice. This in itself is a substantial cause for admission of this evidence at this stage. We, therefore, admitting the additional evidence under r. 29 of the ITAT Rules, 1963, think it proper that the matter should go back to the file of the CIT(A) to pass an order afresh keeping in view the decision of jurisdictional High Court. We, therefore, set aside the orders of the CIT(A) and remand the matters back to him for disposal afresh in accordance with law. 6. In the result, all the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes.
-
1993 (2) TMI 141 - ITAT DELHI-C
High Court, Immovable Property, Market Value, Movable Property, Municipal Corporation, Valuation Date, Valuation Officer
-
1993 (2) TMI 140 - ITAT DELHI-C
A Firm, Carrying On Business, Debt Owed, Purchase And Sale ... ... ... ... ..... sion of Hon ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT v. Salkia Transport Associates 1983 13 Taxman 191 (Cal.) and the decision of Kerala High Court in the case of Parthas Trust, the assessee is entitled to depreciation. It is pertinent to mention here that the department in subsequent assessment year 1987-88 has itself allowed depreciation to the assessee trust which is clear from the order of the CIT (Appeals) dated 18-5-1990, where following the decision of Kerala High Court in the case of Nidish Transport Corpn. and decision of Allahabad High Court in the case of Addl. CIT v. U.P. State Agro Industrial Corpn. Ltd. 1981 127 ITR 97 the CIT (Appeals) has allowed depreciation to the assessee. In view of this, we are of the opinion that the assessee is entitled to depreciation as claimed. We, therefore, set aside the order of the CIT (Appeals) and direct the Income-tax Officer to allow depreciation in respect of these two trucks. 7. In the result, both the appeals are allowed
-
1993 (2) TMI 139 - ITAT DELHI-B
Assessing Officer, Cash Payments, High Court, Interest On Deposit ... ... ... ... ..... employees and since the individual items which are incurred on a day-to-day basis and when required especially when the employees do not have any bank account facility in those places would be squarely covered by the exemption of Rule 6DD(j) of the Act. The reimbursement is not the same as incurring of the expenses, as the reimbursement itself suggest that expenses have already been incurred. We, accordingly, delete the addition of Rs. 41,192. 18. The assessee is aggrieved by non-allowing of deduction of sales tax which remained outstanding on 30th June, 1984 at Rs. 1,78,025 by applying the provision of section 43B of the Act. In view of the jurisdictional High Court decision in Sanghi Motors v. Union of India 1991 187 ITR 703 (Delhi) and Escorts Ltd. v. Union of India 1991 189 ITR 81 (Delhi), we have to uphold the disallowance. We only direct the Assessing Officer to allow deduction of the amount in the year of actual payment. 19. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part
-
1993 (2) TMI 138 - ITAT DELHI-A
Assessing Officer, Delay In Filing, Income From Property, Previous Year ... ... ... ... ..... at section 11(2) does not prescribe any time-limit for investment of accumulation of a charitable trust in Government securities. We have already referred to the two decisions given by the Madras High Court and the J and K High Court wherein it was held that the time-limit prescribed in the Rules are beyond the scope of the Act and are, therefore, invalid. In view of the above, we find that there was no time-limit for filing Form No. 10. The assessee had filed Form No. 10 along with the return on 21-10-1986. In view of the decisions of the Madras High Court and the J and K High Court, we find that there is no time-limit under section 11(2) for giving a notice to the Assessing Officer specifying the purpose for which the income is being accumulated or set apart by the institution. Therefore, ground No. 6 is also rejected. 12. No other ground has been raised by the Revenue in either of the appeals. 13. In the result, both the appeals are found to have no force and are dismissed
-
1993 (2) TMI 137 - ITAT COCHIN
Balancing Charge, Capital Gains, Insurance Company, Previous Year, Written Down Value ... ... ... ... ..... 36. Repairs and insurance are governed by section 31 and taxes are regulated under section 30. Such expenditure cannot be construed as running and maintenance expenditure of motor cars described under section 37(3A) of the Act. Respectfully following our own decision, for the reasons stated therein, we uphold the order of the CIT (Appeals). 12. The second point at dispute is about the deletion of the disallowance made under section 43B of the IT Act. The assessee has paid the provident fund contributions collected in the month of December 1983, only on 15th of the following month. This was brought to tax under section 43B. In the light of the decision of the Tribunal in the case of N. Raghavan Pillai v. ITO 1991 KLJ (TC) 75, we hold that as the assessee has not paid the amount to the Government within the time allowed, section 43B is not attracted. For this reason, we decline to interfere with the order of the CIT (Appeals). 13. In the result the revenue s appeal is dismissed
-
1993 (2) TMI 136 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... ocesses carried upon by the assessee do not show that the assessee is engaged in the manufacture or production of any article or thing within the meaning of s. 32A. The learned CIT(A), however, has allowed the assessee s ground by relying on a few decisions. 7. We find that Special Bench of the Tribunal in Dy. CIT and Ors. vs. Shree Lalit Fabrics Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. (1992) 198 ITR (AT) 190 (Chd) (SB) has held that Bleaching, dyeing and printing of grey cloth amount to manufacture for the purposes of s. 32A. The learned counsel for the assessee further pointed out that the five Judge Bench of the Hon ble jurisdictional High Court of Punjab and Haryana in the case reported in CIT vs. Sovrin Knit Works (1993) 109 CTR (P and H) 310 (FB) (1993) 199 ITR 679 (P and H) (FB) has held that the aforementioned activities amount to manufacture for purposes of s. 32A. Relying on the aforesaid authorities, we uphold the order of the learned CIT(A). 8. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.
-
1993 (2) TMI 135 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
Bonus Shares, General Reserve ... ... ... ... ..... balance-sheet, general reserve as per such balance-sheet came to Rs. 93,09,997. Out of this amount, a sum of Rs. 30 lacs was reduced being utilised for issue of bonus shares, thus leaving a balance of Rs. 63,09,997. This was the position in books as on 15-10-1982. A sum of Rs. 60,73,092 was credited to the reserves account much later on 31-12-1982. So on the face of it, it is not possible to accept the contention of the learned Counsel for the assessee that the withdrawal of an amount of Rs. 30 lacs on account of bonus shares should be attributed to the profit earned during the year. The facts are clear that the amount of Rs. 30 lacs has been utilised for issue of bonus shares out of the brought forward balance of Rs. 93,09,997 in the general reserves account. This argument of the assessee, therefore, fails. 12. Taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances of the case, we uphold the conclusions of the learned CIT(A). 13. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.
-
1993 (2) TMI 134 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
Assessing Officer, Cash Credits, Income From Undisclosed Sources ... ... ... ... ..... aimed by the assessee has been held to be excessive and unreasonable. The three authorities cited supra, therefore, do not support the case of the assessee because the facts are completely different. While the assessee itself had surrendered a sum of Rs. 60,000 on account of unexplained cash credit, the other addition of Rs. 35,000 had been made because the expenditure claimed was found to be excessive and unreasonable. Both these items operate in different orbits and there is no question of telescoping the same. It is also not substantiated that the expenses were not excessive or unreasonable. Taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances of the case, we hold that the learned CIT (Appeals) was wrong in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 35,000 by telescoping it against the surrender of an amount of Rs. 60,000. The order of the first appellate authority on this point is reversed and that of the Assessing Officer restored. 10. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1993 (2) TMI 133 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
Burden Of Proof, Equity Shares ... ... ... ... ..... the provisions of section 4(1)(a) and taxed the deemed gift at the hands of the assessee. The CIT(A) had himself deleted this addition. In the case of Suchita Oswal, the deemed gift addition was deleted by the CIT(A). The history cited above of other cases of the group shows that the transaction of the assessee was bona fide. The department has not brought any material on record to show that it was not a genuine transaction. 19. In view of the evidence and the legal position discussed above, we are of the opinion that revenue authorities had gone wrong in invoking section 4(1)(a) of the G.T. Act regarding valuation of M/s Oswal Woollen Mills Ltd. s shares for purposes of gift tax. We, therefore, set aside the order of the CGT(A). 20. Regarding the alternative ground, since we are of the opinion that provisions of section 4(1)(a) were not validly invoked, there is no question of considering the alternative submission of the assessee. 21. In the result, the appeals are allowed.
-
1993 (2) TMI 132 - ITAT CALCUTTA-B
Balancing Charge, Business Income, Capital Gains, Insurance Company, Shipping Business, Shipping Company
-
1993 (2) TMI 131 - ITAT BOMBAY-A
A Firm, A Partner, Gross Total Income, Individual Partner, Share Income ... ... ... ... ..... gross total income of the assessee was Rs. 26,949. The Assessing Officer has already allowed sixty per cent deduction in respect of dividend received of Rs. 1,500, which has directly been received by the assessee. This leaves a balance of Rs. 25,449. This alone could be said to have been included in the gross total income of the assessee and not the gross dividend of Rs. 91,100, on which deduction has been allowed by the first appellate authority. This view is in consonance with the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Distributors (Baroda) (P.) Ltd., relied upon by the learned Departmental Representative and also not seriously disputed by the learned counsel for the assessee. In these circumstances, the deduction under section 80M of the Act would be available 60 per cent on Rs. 25,449 as against on Rs. 91,100 allowed by the first appellate authority. The order of the first appellate authority is modified to this extent. 8. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed
-
1993 (2) TMI 130 - ITAT BOMBAY-A
Equity Shares, Substantially Interested ... ... ... ... ..... usband or son as the holding or ownership of the assessee or to include the same for determining the assessee s interest in the company. The assessee having held only 100 out of 14700 shares of the company could not be a person having not less than twenty per cent voting right so as to invoke the provisions of section 2(22)(e) of the Act. This provision, in my opinion, is not applicable in the present case and the addition made therefor requires deletion. As the section itself is not applicable, I need not go into the other aspects of the matter as to whether the amount of Rs. 66,931 was a loan or advance to the assessee, or whether only the net amount of Rs. 20,085, after setting off the credit balance of the assessee alone, could be added as the income of the assessee under section 2(22)(e) of the Act. 6. The other ground regarding levy of interest under section 217 of the Act is stated to be consequential and requires no discussion. 7. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1993 (2) TMI 129 - ITAT BOMBAY-A
Assessing Officer, Export Business, Profits And Gains Of Business Or Profession ... ... ... ... ..... under the head Profits and gains of a business or profession . On the other hand, the deduction to a person falling under clause (b) thereof is to be computed in the following manner Export turnover Profits of the business x ---------------------------- Total turnover 10. In these circumstances, in my opinion, the Assessing Officer was not justified in reducing the amount of service charges from the profits of the assessee in arriving at the deduction of the profit derived from the export of goods or merchandise out of India. It is the amount which bears to the profits of the business the same proportion as the export turnover of the assessee in respect of which goods bears to the total turnover of the business carried on by the assessee. In the result, the amount of deduction of Rs. 3,42,277 claimed by the assessee was in accordance with law. I, therefore, uphold the order of first appellate authority, though for different reasons. 11. In the result, the appeal is dismissed
............
|
