|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 101 to 120 of 161 Records
-
1995 (6) TMI 61 - ITAT DELHI
Assessing Officer, Best Judgment Assessment, In Part ... ... ... ... ..... by the Assessing Officer are prima facie not tenable. However, the Appellate Tribunal at this stage is not in a position to scrutinise books of account as should be done by the Assessing Officer. It would not be right to accept evidence produced before us as conclusive and delete the additions. This would give unfair advantage to the assessee. On the facts of the case the just and fair course would be to ask the Assessing Officer to examine entries in the books of account and then make a fresh assessment on the three points raised before us in the light of our observations. The assessee has undertaken to co-operate with the Assessing Officer and produce an relevant material before him. In case books of account are not produced, the Assessing Officer may hold that earlier conclusion drawn was correct. With above observations, we set aside impugned order and restore the matter back to the Assessing Officer. 9. In the result, assessee s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes
-
1995 (6) TMI 60 - ITAT DELHI
Assessing Officer, Cash Credits, Original Assessment, Original Order ... ... ... ... ..... peals) simply held that the Assessing Officer was fully justified making the disallowance if the same was not a legitimate deduction . Both the orders of the Assessing Officer and the CIT (Appeals) are not speaking orders. The CIT (Appeals) left the question open by observing if the same was not a legitimate deduction . Such non-speaking orders deserve to be annulled. Reliance is placed on the judgment of Gauhati High Court in the case of Baidya Nath Sarma v. CWT 1983 140 ITR 801 where Supreme Court s judgments in Mahabir Prasad Santosh Kumar v. State of U.P. AIR 1970 SC 1302 and Manager, Government Branch Press v. D.B. Belliappa AIR 1979 SC 429 were followed. Accordingly we delete the disallowance of Rs. 98,532. 39. The charging of interest under sections 139(8) and 217 is consequential. 40. The assessee s claim for awarding of costs is not allowable in view of the judgment of the Madras High Court in the case of R.M. Seshadri. 41. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed
-
1995 (6) TMI 59 - ITAT COCHIN
... ...
... ... ..... is granted. 6. In ITA No. 47/Coch/1991, the assessee is aggrieved against the levy of penalty under s. 271(1)(a) of the IT Act. The return of income was to be filed on 31st July, 1985 whereas it was filed only on 12th Aug., 1987. The explanation was that the accountant who was writing up their accounts had left the services at the end of the year and that there was delay in fixing another person to complete the accounts. Further it was contended that its income will be below the taxable limit. These explanations were rejected by the authorities and levied penalty under s. 271(1)(a) of the Act. The assessee is aggrieved. 7. Having heard rival submissions, we decline to interfere with the levy of penalty. The assessee has not adduced evidence in support of its contentions. However, since relief had been granted in the quantum appeal, we direct the AO to quantify the amount of penalty giving effect to the order of the Tribunal. 8. In the result, the appeals are partly allowed.
-
1995 (6) TMI 58 - ITAT COCHIN
Assessing Officer, Assessment Year, Business Expenditure, Expenditure Incurred, Export Business, Foreign Exchange, Sale Proceeds, Such Employee, Total Income
-
1995 (6) TMI 57 - ITAT COCHIN
Additional Tax, Assessing Officer ... ... ... ... ..... sums mentioned in clauses (b), (c), and (d) of section 43B. We uphold his contention for the reasons stated by him. So far as clause (i) of column 7 is concerned, it is for the authorities to redraft column 7 of the prescribed form in order to avoid ambiguities in the information obtained from tax audit in respect of items covered in clause (a) to clause (d) of section 43B. We further hold that on the basis of the information contained in column 7 of the tax audit report, it cannot be readily inferred that it referred to the items mentioned in clause (a) of section 43B and any inference based on that so as to invoke the provisions of the said clause for disallowing the interest on the loans from the public financial institutions must necessarily fail. For the reason also we delete the disallowance. As a result, the levy of additional tax in relation to the disallowance of interest loan from the public financial institutions is deleted. 10. In the result, the appeal is allowed
-
1995 (6) TMI 56 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... a wide variation between the returned and the assessed income. The assessee could not be said to have anticipated or foreseen the additions to which he agreed during the course of assessment proceedings. One has to see the state of mind of the assessee when on estimate of advance tax is filed and this cannot be related to the actual nitty-gritty of the assessment made. We find that most of the additions have been made on an agreed basis and we accept the argument of the learned counsel for the assessee that the agreement was arrived at to purchase peace of mind. Penalty proceedings are quasi-judicial in character and the mere variation between the assessed income and the returned income cannot be the sole basis for imposing a penalty for default under s. 273 without proving further the contumacious conduct of or the lack of bona fides on the part of the assessee. For this reason also, we delete the penalty. 9. In the result, the penalty in deleted and the appeal is allowed.
-
1995 (6) TMI 55 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... register has been maintained as required under the Excise Rules. The AO could have examined the stock register so as to verify, if the supplies recorded were in order, or not. It is not so done. The estimate made in both the cases has no basis at all. If purchases have been accepted, the sales could not be enhanced unless there was a finding that a specific profit rate is found to be applicable in this line of trade. Neither the AO nor the first appellate authority has adopted any specific profit rate. The enhancement appears to be arbitrary and on ad hoc basis. Moreover, as already seen, the entire sale proceeds could not be treated to be profit in the hands of the assessee. In these circumstances, we find that the assessees appeals deserve to be accepted and the Revenue s appeals, against the reduction in enhancement made by the first appellate authority are liable to be rejected. 9. In the result, the assessee s appeals are allowed and the Revenue s appeals are dismissed.
-
1995 (6) TMI 54 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
Assessing Officer, Book Entries, Cash Payments, Flat Rate ... ... ... ... ..... that payments made in cash were not permissible in law. Every violation of section 40A(3) did not empower the AO to punish the assessee only because the assessee failed to furnish adequate evidence justifying the payments in cash. As we have already observed, the primary aim was to stop the fictitious transactions and false payments and, therefore, when the profit of the assessee was determined after rejecting the books of account, the revenue fulfilled its object by arriving at the income of the assessee. If further addition of Rs. 1,83,570 is allowed, then the net profit rate would work out at more than 18 which does not appear to be appropriate in view of the nature of business of the assessee. Therefore, we are not inclined to look into the merits because the very addition appears to be totally uncalled for and unwarranted after the net profit rate was made applicable and the books of account were rejected. 7. In the result, the appeal succeeds and the addition is deleted
-
1995 (6) TMI 53 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
Accounting Year, New Industrial Undertaking, Profits And Gains ... ... ... ... ..... , it would appear that the facts in the instant case are similar to those found in the case of Rockweld Electrodes India Ltd. In the assessee s case, the initial year of relief under section 80J was assessment year 1981-82. As a result of the change in the accounting year, no assessment was framed in the assessee s hands for assessment year 1982-83. As per section 80J(2), the assessee was entitled to claim relief for assessment years 1982-83, 1983-84, 1984-85 and 1985-86 in addition to the initial year i.e., the assessment year 1981-82. It was immaterial whether an actual assessment did result in the assessee s case or not but as per the law, relief under section 80J(2) was admissible only up to the assessment year 1985-86. The assessee was, therefore, not entitled to deduction under section 80J(2) for assessment year 1986-87. We, therefore, reverse the order of the learned CIT(A) on the point and restore that of the Assessing Officer. 8. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1995 (6) TMI 52 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
Net Wealth, Valuation Officer, Wealth Tax Act ... ... ... ... ..... n contained in Schedule III of the Wealth-tax Act for valuing the cold storage of the assessee for assessment year 1986-87. This is, however, subject to one condition which is discussed hereafter. 17. Rule 8 of the said Schedule empowers the Wealth-tax Officer not to apply the rules contained in Part B of Schedule III under certain specific conditions. We keep his powers under rule 8 wide open in the present case as well. If the Assessing Officer finds that rule 8 in Part B of Schedule III does not stand in the way of applying Schedule III to the assessee s case, then he shall apply the provisions of Schedule III and value of cold storage accordingly. 18. This direction is, however, subject to a rider that if the valuation thus arrived at under Schedule III works out to less than Rs. 12,51,926 as shown by the assessee himself, then the valuation shall be adopted at Rs. 12,51,926. The appeal is disposed of in the light of the above observations and shall be treated as allowed.
-
1995 (6) TMI 51 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
Failure To Deduct Tax At Source, Interest Income ... ... ... ... ..... ay mention that under section 4(1) of the Act which is the charging section, the principal liability for payment of income-tax is that of the person who receives income. Sub-section (2) of section 4 provides that income-tax shall be deducted at source and paid in advance where it is so deductible or payable under any provisions of the Act. Since the principal liability for payment of income-tax is of the person who receives the income which in the present matters is the payee Shri R.K. Garg and if he has also paid the tax on the income so received, then in all fairness, even if technically the default for not deducting the tax at source continues, for all intents and purposes such a default disappears as soon as the recipient of the income discharges his principal liability and pays the tax. For that reason also the revenue s appeals deserve to be rejected and are hereby rejected. 17. In the result, while the assessee s appeals are allowed, those of the revenue are dismissed.
-
1995 (6) TMI 50 - ITAT BOMBAY-E
... ...
... ... ..... s get proper shelter. To facilitate the task the section was enacted. It is a benevolent provision, therefore should not be construed too technically. 10. Take an example. X constructs a house on a plot owned by him. First year he sells shares and construct ground floor of the house. Next year again he sells the shares and construct first floor. Benefit under s. 54F cannot be denied just because X in the first year owns ground floor of the house. The meaning of the word owns on the date of transfer of original asset is in relation to an identifiable different unit, and not in respect of the same unit. Therefore, in our opinion conditions precedent for availing the benefit of s. 54F did exist in the facts and circumstances of the case. We, therefore, direct the AO to allow the benefit of s. 54F to the assessee. In view of this finding it is not necessary to decide the other issues. We, therefore, decline to comment over the same. In the result appeal stands allowed pro tanto.
-
1995 (6) TMI 49 - ITAT BOMBAY-E
Assessment Year ... ... ... ... ..... 17. No we examine the purpose for which travel grant was given to the appellant. It was explained that it was given to provide an opportunity to get first hand experience and become practically acquainted at close quarters with the rapid scientific developments, taking place all over the world, in the medical field particularly in the line of orthopaedics. 18. Considering the profession of the appellant, his specialised knowledge in the field of orthopaedics and his educational qualifications, the appellant can very well be placed in the category of scholars. The travel grant was provided to the appellant so that he could sharpen his erudite in the field of orthopaedics. Therefore, in our opinion, the amount of Rs. 15,000 given to the assessee clearly comes within the ken of section 10(16) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. We, therefore, direct the Assessing Officer to grant exemption as contemplated in the said section. 19. In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed
-
1995 (6) TMI 48 - ITAT BOMBAY-B
... ...
... ... ..... s of the learned Departmental Representatives that the books of account were not relied upon and that the admission made by the assessee is a good evidence because the admission is clear. If the admission made by the assessee was so spontaneous, then the assessee should not have retracted immediately on the second day of the search and seizure. The decision of the Kerala High Court in Vazhakal Estate vs. State of Kerala (1994) 210 ITR 451 (Ker), M.P. High Court in S.S. Ratanchand Bholanath vs. CIT (1995) 124 CTR (MP) 28 (1994) 210 ITR 682 (MP) and a decision of the Tribunal in Smt. Vasanti Sethi vs. Asstt. CIT (1993) 45 TTJ (Del) 503 are distinguished on facts. Every case stands on its own foot. Undoubtedly the facts in these cases leading to distinguish the decisions are that a seized paper relating to a subsequent year cannot become the yardstick for estimation of income for the earlier year. 16. In this view of the matter, the appellant succeeds and the appeal is allowed.
-
1995 (6) TMI 47 - ITAT BOMBAY
Bonus Shares, Business Income, Business Loss, Capital Gains, Loss On Sale, Right Shares, Sale Proceeds
-
1995 (6) TMI 46 - ITAT BOMBAY
Backward Area, Industrial Undertaking, Profits And Gains ... ... ... ... ..... those components by which the ship was constructed or manufactured and if it is possible to reassemble those pieces or parts, the ship may be manufactured or constructed. Hence in our view it would be doing violence to the language if we say that while we are dismantling or breaking or destroying a ship we are in effect manufacturing or producing an article or a thing. In these circumstances applying the law laid down by the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of N.C Budharaja and Co. and by the Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of Sterling Foods (Goa) we come to only one conclusion and that is that the activity of breaking or dismantling a ship or ships cannot be considered to be an industrial undertaking which manufactures or produces articles or things and hence we hold that it is not entitled to the deductions mentioned in sections 80-HHA and 80-I of the I.T.Act. We therefore reverse the order of the ld. CIT(A) in this regard. The appeal filed by the revenue is allowed.
-
1995 (6) TMI 45 - ITAT BOMBAY
Capital Gains, Investment Company ... ... ... ... ..... t the facts and the computation. The only reason why the department has not followed the ratio of the Supreme Court is that, in the case of Miss Dhun Dadabhoy Kapadia, it was the case of an individual and the assessee before us is a corporate body. The case of Miss Dhun Dadabhoy Kapadia was the case of an investor and not a dealer in stock-in-trade. In a foregoing paragraph we have already held that the assessee is an investor in shares. The Bombay High Court in K.A. Patch s case, held that the principle laid down by the Supreme Court in Miss Dhun Dababhoy Kapadia s case applies even in the case of dealer in shares. Having accepted the position that the assessee is an investor in shares and, therefore, is entitled to claim the short term capital loss in respect of the renouncement of the rights, the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in Miss Dhun Dadabhoy Kapadia s case and K.A. Patch s case clearly support the case of the assessee. 7. In the result, appeal is allowed.
-
1995 (6) TMI 44 - ITAT BOMBAY
Assessing Officer, Business Expenditure, Foreign Exchange ... ... ... ... ..... ught to be undertaken in documents which are prepared prior to the commencement of the tour. It is a different thing to attribute the expenses actually incurred to the said purpose or purposes. For, the purpose of which the tour is undertaken may not actually be achieved and the moneys may be spent for a different purpose. It is necessary, therefore, that the relevant evidence is placed on record to prove the purpose for which the expense is actually incurred. (Page 602 of the report) 16. In view of these observations of the Hon ble Court even if it could be argued that our decision contrary to the decision of the Special Bench of the Tribunal or other Benches of the Tribunal, which in fact it is not as we have distinguished the facts of those cases, still since our decision is more in consonance with the decision of the Jurisdictional High Court, we would respectfully follow it. We, therefore, allow the appeal filed by the revenue and dismiss the appeal filed by the assessee
-
1995 (6) TMI 43 - ITAT BOMBAY
Cash System, Mineral Oil, Profits And Gains ... ... ... ... ..... deals with the amount paid or payable to the assessee. The language of the section indicates that receipts are to be taxed on the accrual basis. This section was inserted by the Finance Act, 1987. It is a piece of retroactive legislation and effect was given from 1-4-1983. Therefore, during the relevant assessment year mandate of section is to be followed. As per the section, the sum equal to 10 per cent of the aggregate of the amounts specified in sub-section (2) shall be deemed to be profits and gains of such business chargeable to tax under the head Profits and gains of business or profession . Sub-section (2) deals with the amounts paid or payable whether in or out of India and also the amount received or deemed to be received in India. This, in our opinion, refers to the amount received on accrual basis. We, therefore, uphold the order of the Assessing Officer and reverse the order of the CIT(A) on this count. 14. In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands allowed.
-
1995 (6) TMI 42 - ITAT BANGALORE
... ...
... ... ..... cision of the Ahmedabad Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ITO vs. Sethna Ice and Cold Storage (1980) 9 TTJ (Ahd) 537 and the decision of the Jaipur Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Singhvi Woollen Industries vs. ITO (1980) 10 TTJ (JP) 276. In all these cases it is held that when account books were properly maintained with regard to cost of construction, and the same were not rejected by the Assessing Officer, reference to valuation cell for estimate was not justified. In the instant case not only the assessment order does not dismiss the accounts, the remand report given by the Assessing Officer fully supports the claim of the assessee. 27. For the foregoing, we hold that the returned cost which is unshaken by the Assessing Officer deserves to be accepted. Consequently, no addition is called for under s. 69. Reversing the orders of the authorities below, the entire addition made towards cost of construction is deleted. The assessee succeeds. 28. The appeal is allowed.
....
|
