|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 161 to 180 of 304 Records
-
1993 (3) TMI 154 - ITAT DELHI-C
From Other Sources, Income From House Property, Interest Income ... ... ... ... ..... of interest had been credited to her bank account. In our opinion, the expenditure incurred by the assessee to make visits to the bank for the aforesaid purpose cannot be treated as expenditure which has any nexus with the earning of the income itself. As noted by both the tax authorities, the interest is suo motu credited by the bank to the assessee s account and that is the stage at which the income accrues. In case, the assessee chose to visit the bank to verify the entries in her bank account and for which purpose expenditure to the tune of Rs. 17,643 per annum had to be incurred, then the same, by no stretch of imagination can be treated as an allowable deduction since it has no bearing on the earning of the said income. The provisions of section 57 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 do not envisage any such deduction. In this view of the matter, we set aside the order passed by the DC (Appeals) and restore that of the Income-tax Officer. 7. In the result, the appeal is allowed
-
1993 (3) TMI 153 - ITAT DELHI-C
Industrial Company ... ... ... ... ..... o be considered. We have also taken note of the observations of their lordships of the Hon ble Andhra Pradesh High Court pertaining to the meaning of the word attributable in contradistinction to the term derived from. 20. Before we part with these appeals, it would be necessary on our part to mention that, on absolutely identical facts, the CIT(Appeals) in assessment years 1978-79 and 1979-80 treated the assessee as an Industrial Company and the statement made by the learned counsel to the effect that the aforesaid decisions were accepted by the department remained uncontroverted on the part of the Departmental Representative. We would also like to state that there is no dispute about the figures for the four assessment years, insofar as they pertain to realisation from pictures and realisation on extra prints since the aggregate of these exceeds 51 per cent of the total receipts in all the assessment years under consideration. 21. In the result, all the appeals are allowed.
-
1993 (3) TMI 152 - ITAT DELHI-C
Investment Allowance ... ... ... ... ..... ourt has drawn a distinction as under --- In the later two sub-clauses (of section 33) there is a specific reference to the assessee s business premises where the machinery is to be installed. Similarly, the language of sub-clause (a) of section 32A(2) stands in clear contrast to the language used in its sub-clause (b). Each machinery installed in a particular manner is the cause for the investment allowance, to be granted to the person who owns the machinery, provided, the owner uses it in its entirety in his business. In view of, this, we are of the opinion that the case of the assessee is squarely covered by the decision of Karnataka High Court and the decision of the Special Bench in the case of First Leasing Co. of India Ltd. Therefore, investment allowance was rightly allowed by the CIT (Appeal). We do not find any substance in this ground. The ground is hereby rejected. 17. In the result, the assessee s appeal is partly allowed whereas the revenue s appeal is dismissed
-
1993 (3) TMI 151 - ITAT DELHI-B
Assessing Officer, Question Of Law, Reference To High Court, Supreme Court, Tax Authorities ... ... ... ... ..... cluded in the income of the assessee then no technical objection in respect of the limitation shall be raised by the assessee in future in any proceedings and for the purpose of satisfying the contention regarding opportunity of hearing the same should be treated as having been fulfilled. He further went on to submit that the only purpose was to reduce the multiplicity of proceedings by not making unnecessary reference to the Hon ble High Court since the power already existed in the statute enabling the income-tax authorities, to modify the assessment of the assessee. Considering this contention we hold that no reference be made as no useful purpose will be served because now in case the assessment is required to be modified in future because of the decisions of the Hon ble High Court or Supreme Court, as the case may be, then the income-tax authorities shall have free and unfettered power to modify the assessment of the assessee. 6. In the result the application is rejected.
-
1993 (3) TMI 150 - ITAT DELHI-A
Assessing Officer, Mistake Apparent From Record, Sales Tax ... ... ... ... ..... the first instance. And if such a disallowance had been made, the assessee was entitled to claim rectification of the intimation. The learned D.R. is only starting with the second stage and forgetting the first one. If the error was committed at the first stage itself, correction of that error by way of application under section 154 was only a logical consequence. We, therefore, hold that under these circumstances, the Assessing Officer should have allowed the claim of the assessee under section 154 and deleted the disallowance aggregating to Rs. 33,82,442 and the first appellate authority should not have upheld the order of the Assessing Officer. Taking the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case into consideration and taking a pragmatic view of the matter and not getting enmeshed by technicalities, we hold that the assessee was entitled to the deletion of Rs. 33,82,442 from its total income as determined under the intimation. 8. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1993 (3) TMI 149 - ITAT COCHIN
... ...
... ... ..... rial is that if the disclosure was full and complete and was made voluntarily, that is, prior to detection by the Revenue, in our considered opinion, penalty is not leviable. In the case of the assessee, the disclosed income was accepted and acted upon and as a matter of fact the proposal to assess the assessee at a higher figure was abandoned. So the disclosure was full and complete. Except suspicions and some enquiries about which the assessee did not have any knowledge, we hold that the disclosure was voluntarily made and the assessee had surrendered the income to avoid litigation. In such circumstances and in the ratio laid in Sir Shadilal Sugar and General Mills Ltd. vs. CIT it is not possible for us to hold that mens rea can be attributed to the assessee. The cases relied on by the learned Chartered Accountant of the assessee would justify cancellation of penalty in the facts and circumstances of the case. We order accordingly. 16. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1993 (3) TMI 148 - ITAT COCHIN
... ...
... ... ..... rning to the assessee s appeal the grievance of Sri Srinivasan is that having held that the sum of Rs. 3,11,380 represented deposits and that the peak credit amounted to only Rs. 1,06,000 and the unaccounted educational expenses and household expenses would all be covered by the amount of Rs. 3,25,000 offered by the assessee as income from other sources in his return of income, the CIT(A) should not have sustained an addition of Rs. 50,000 on ad hoc basis entering the realm of conjunctures and surmises. 10. In our considered opinion, once the CIT(A) has found that the sum of Rs. 3,25,000 was more than sufficient to explain the outgoings in the form of unaccounted educational expenses, estimated household expenses and unaccounted bank deposits etc., no case is made out for making an addition on ad hoc basis. Therefore the addition sustained by the CIT(A) to the extent of Rs. 50,000 is deleted. 11. In the result, the Revenue s appeal fails end the assessee s appeal is allowed.
-
1993 (3) TMI 147 - ITAT COCHIN
Additional Depreciation, Assessing Officer, Change In Method, Income Returned, Sales Tax Refund, Total Income
-
1993 (3) TMI 146 - ITAT COCHIN
Assessing Officer, Mistake Apparent From Record, Rectification Of Mistakes ... ... ... ... ..... the expression purchase price in section 44AC and section 206C shall mean, in the State of Andhra Pradesh in respect of arrack, only the issue price as understood in the Andhra Pradesh Excise Act and the Rules made thereunder, now in force in this State. The true meaning and content of the expression purchase price is, however, different............ (vi) The collection at source provided by section 206C is relatable to the purchase price and not to the income component of the purchase price. Such being the case, we hold that the Income-tax Officer erred in invoking the provisions of section 44AC in determining the income of the assessee in an assessment under section 143(1)(a) of the Act. Therefore he ought to have rectified the same in a petition under section 154 of the Act. These aspects of the matter were not properly appreciated by the CIT (Appeals) in his detailed order, and as a result, we are not persuaded to sustain his order. 8. In the result, the appeal is allowed
-
1993 (3) TMI 145 - ITAT COCHIN
Any Person, Income From Property, Religious Trust ... ... ... ... ..... trust and this is not a case of trust carrying on a business. Thus, we reject the revenue s contention. 4. The assessee s representative forcibly contended that in spite of article 40, the trust had not spent any amount on purposes other than charities and in this connection he took us through the account of the trust for the relevant previous year. While upholding that the company is a charitable trust entitled for exemption under section 11 of the Act, since the ITO did not have an occasion to examine the accounts aspect of the matter, we set aside the order of the CIT (Appeals) and restore the same to the file of the Income-tax Officer with a direction to examine whether the company had spent any amount on unauthorised purpose or not and pass appropriate order, as he deems fit. The ITO is directed to give an opportunity to file the audit report in the prescribed form before the completion of the assessment. 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed
-
1993 (3) TMI 144 - ITAT COCHIN
Assessing Officer, Immovable Property, Movable Property, Valuation Officer, Valuation Report
-
1993 (3) TMI 143 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
Method Of Accounting, Rejection Of Accounts
... ... ... ... ..... n computing the income. which he failed to do. That failure cannot be justified by placing reliance upon judicial authorities, which turn out upon the facts peculiar to those cases ignoring at the same time the all pervasive circulars issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes applicable to all assessments made by the Income-tax Officer in the country wherever income was to be arrived at by estimating the net profit. The net profit shown by the assessee after depreciation as per books worked out to 1.2 per cent. If 10 per cent net profit was applied and depreciation was allowed thereafter, the rate of profit would work out to a reasonable percentage, which would conform to the net profit rates arrived at after depreciation in the case of other contractors. 8. For these reasons I would agree with the opinion expressed by the learned Accountant Member. The matter will now go before the regular Bench for the disposal of the appeal in accordance with the opinion of the majority.
-
1993 (3) TMI 142 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
Deductions, Profits And Gains From Industrial Undertaking. ... ... ... ... ..... also submitted that while section 32AB allowed deduction from the total income of the assessee, relief under section 80-I had to be allowed on the basis of profits and gains. 36. As regards the claim under section 32AB, the learned D.R. submitted that even the partial relief allowed by the learned CIT(A) was not correct as was pointed out in ground No. 2 of the cross appeal. 37. We have considered the rival submissions and we find considerable merit in the arguments by the learned Counsel for the assessee. Since the claim under section 32AB has been made in respect of cast iron foundry, SMS-V and rolling mill on which no deduction under section 80-I has been claimed, the question of reducing the assessee s claim under section 32AB for purposes of computing relief under section 80-I does not arise. While the assessee s submission on the point is accepted, the revenue s ground being No. 2 is rejected. 38 to 40. These paras are not reproduced here as they involved minor issues.
-
1993 (3) TMI 141 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
A Partner, Advance Tax, Assessing Officer, Assessment Order, Business Premises, Interest Payable By Assessee, Tax Authorities, Waiver Of Interest
-
1993 (3) TMI 140 - ITAT CALCUTTA-E
... ...
... ... ..... f repairs to them. He found that during the year under appeal. Similar expenditure was very low at Rs. 27,635. He, therefore, held that the assessee had no justification in claiming such wastage as it did. He also noticed that the assessee did not maintain any manufacturing account in the assessment year under review. These findings have not been seriously contested before us on behalf of the assessee. As rightly held by the CIT(A), if there is no more leakage of water from the ice cans, those cans having been repaired in the earlier year, it is not possible for the assessee to justify the excess wastage on that account. However, the CIT(A) himself has considered that there will be some wastage. Taking an overall view of the matter and all the facts and circumstances of the case, we consider it proper to reduce the addition to Rs. 10,000 in the place of Rs. 15,000 sustained by the CIT(A). Relief Rs. 5,000. The appeals for the asst. yrs. 1985-86 to 1987-88 are partly allowed.
-
1993 (3) TMI 139 - ITAT CALCUTTA-E
Appellate Authority, Appellate Orders, Assessment Order, Earned Income, Factory Building, Orders Passed, Original Assessment, Purchase Price
-
1993 (3) TMI 138 - ITAT CALCUTTA-C
Amnesty Scheme, Assessing Officer, Held By Assessee, Orders Prejudicial To Interests, Original Assessment
-
1993 (3) TMI 137 - ITAT BOMBAY-E
Assessing Officer ... ... ... ... ..... essee. As aforesaid, the gift-tax is charged from the donor and not from the donee. Donee can be called upon to face the charge only when the conditions laid down in section 21A of the Act are satisfied. These conditions are to be satisfied not by the assessee, but by the Assessing Officer, so as to assume jurisdiction. Diligence presupposes what a person with common-sense would do to trace a person at a right place at a right time. In this case, as aforesaid, no efforts at all have been made by the Assessing Officer to trace the donor, on the facts and circumstances of the case, in our opinion, the CGT(A) was perfectly justified in cancelling the assessment by observing that the primary condition for making the assessment on the donee in terms of section 21A of the Act were not satisfied in the case and that the very service of the notice on the donee for filing the gift-tax return was not proper and legal. We, therefore, uphold the impugned order. 5. The appeal is dismissed
-
1993 (3) TMI 136 - ITAT BOMBAY-D
Penalty, For Concealment Of Income ... ... ... ... ..... orward with the filing of the voluntary returns preventing thereby the department from pursuing the matter further. Having prevented the department from pursuing the matter further, I don t think it is open to the assessee to say, leaving aside the legal authorities, that the department is still to establish that the loans surrendered represented the concealed income of the assessee. 10. For these reasons. I am of the opinion that (1) on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT (Appeals) was justified in upholding the penalties imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act for the assessment years 1979-80 and 1980-81 (2) Since it was urged that the levy of penalties under section 273(2)(c) was consequential, in my opinion, the CIT (Appeals) was also Justified in upholding the penalties imposed under section 273(2)(c). 11. The matter will now go before the regular Bench for the final disposal of the appeals in accordance with the opinion of the majority.
-
1993 (3) TMI 135 - ITAT BOMBAY-B
Excise Duty, Supreme Court, Trading Receipt ... ... ... ... ..... but acts only as an agent for the merchant manufacturers was not considered. Secondly, it was noted that the deduction was granted in the year in which actual payment was made and therefore, it was considered unnecessary to interfere with the disallowance made in the earlier year under section 43B. In the present case, however, since the assessee had never made a provision for payment of excise duty or claimed a deduction, such a question of disallowing a provision in the earlier year or allowing the deduction in the year of payment did not arise. We are convinced that on the peculiar facts of the case, the disallowance made under section 43B by recasting the Profit and Loss account was not justified. Hence, the disallowances made under section 43B are deleted. The A.O. is directed to recompute the total income of the assessee for all the three assessment years and he is also authorised to recompute the assessments of the partners as a consequence. 8. The appeals are allowed.
............
|
