|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 41 to 60 of 665 Records
-
2008 (11) TMI 709 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ion 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, held as under "4. It is not in dispute that for showing a vicarious liability of a Director of a company upon the complaint it is incumbent to plead that the accused was responsible to the company for the conduct of the business of the company. No such allegation having been made in the complaint petition, in our opinion, the High Court was not correct in passing the impugned judgment. The allegation contained in the complaint petition was that all the accused Directors, participated in the negotiations for obtaining financial help for Accused 1, which in our opinion, would not give rise to an inference that the appellant was responsible for day-today affairs of the company....." See Saroj Kumar Poddar Vs.State(NCT of Delhi)- (2007) 3 SCC 693 Average Advertising Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State, Govt. of N.C.T. & Ors. - (2007) 5 SCC 54 18. For the reasons aforementioned, there is no merit in this appeal. It is dismissed accordingly.
-
2008 (11) TMI 708 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... law in restricting the addition made on account of unexplained deposits in the bank accounts of the assessee to ₹ 5,87,374/- as against ₹ 72,08,996/- on the basis of peak credit theory ? The learned counsel for the respondent volunteers to file the paper books within three months as per rules.
-
2008 (11) TMI 707 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... een issued, 25 long years have elapsed. The rights of the parties have already been crystallized. Not only this, but, it is the report of Shri Rao that the said lands have now been converted and sold for to as many as approximately 1100 persons, by way of residential plots. We do not think that there is any justification at this stage to use a suo moto power and to cancel the Certificates, so as to put the clock back. That would be, in our opinion, a completely unnecessary exercise, not warranted by any of the Sections. In that view, even this argument has to be rejected. Before parting, we must observe that the subsequent orders in case of Late Shri Khaja Shakhir Hussain, Shri Khaja Nasir Hussain and Smt. Razia Sultana, seem to have passed without even noticing the earlier orders passed and without even bothering to send notices to the interested parties. That would be the minimum expectation of law. By that, as it may, the Appeal has no merits, and is dismissed with costs.
-
2008 (11) TMI 706 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... ed salary shown by the assessee firm. 14. It was a common point between the parties that the facts and circumstances in this case are identical to those considered by us in the preceding appeals. Herein also, search under s. 132 was carried out on the business premises of the assessee firm on 6th March, 2007. Herein also the impugned addition has been made on the basis of the statements recorded during search and not with reference to any other evidence. Herein also, the business of the assessee firm is liquor contracts obtained from Excise and Taxation Department of Himachal Pradesh. 15. Therefore, for the reasons outlined in IT(SS) Nos. 22 and 23/Chd/2007 (supra) in the earlier paras, the addition of ₹ 3,14,400 made on account of inflated salary cannot be made under Chapter XIV-B of the Act. The same is hereby deleted. The appeal of the assessee is allowed. Resultantly, the appeals in IT(SS) Nos. 22 and 24/Chd/2007 are allowed and IT(SS) No. 23/Chd/2007 is dismissed.
-
2008 (11) TMI 705 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... changed their 50 right on the old property with the 50 of the Constructed Area.” The appeal was preferred by the Department before the learned Tribunal. The learned Tribunal also after taking into account all the facts and the decisions cited before it and on the basis of the materials placed before it affirmed the order so passed by the CIT (Appeals). We do not find that there is any reason to interfere with the order so passed by the learned Tribunal since this judgment is absolutely based on the evidence and the proper appreciation of the facts and materials which were placed before the learned Tribunal and accordingly, in our considered opinion no substantial question of law is involved to admit this appeal. Hence the appeal is dismissed. All parties concerned are to act on a signed copy of this order on the usual undertakings. Urgent xerox certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties subject to compliance with all requisite formalities.
-
2008 (11) TMI 704 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... oreign exchange receipts taken into account for the purpose of deduction under section 80HHD of the Income Tax Act, 1961 from the total turnover for the purpose of calculation of deduction under section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act, 1961?” Let the Paper Book be filed within 8 weeks from date. Let the appeal be listed for hearing 12 weeks hence. All parties concerned are to act on a signed copy of this order on the usual undertakings. Urgent xerox certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties subject to compliance with all requisite formalities.
-
2008 (11) TMI 703 - ITAT BANGALORE
... ...
... ... ..... e as per TDS Certificate. There is no question of reconciliation for assessing income and neither was it the case of effecting only the gross margin therein in view of the assessee closing its books of account on mercantile system of accounting. We are unable to find any force in learned counsel's raising the additional grounds with respect to reconciliation of TDS Certificate citing a case law reported in 258 ITR 654. The facts and circumstances of the assessee's case clearly indicate that said sum has not been disclosed as income when the books of accounts have been closed including the receipts as per the TDS Certificates. Levy of interest u/s. 234B is mandatory which is to be levied in accordance with the provisions of Income Tax Act. 7. To sum up, on the facts and circumstances as have been brought on record, the order of the learned CIT(A) calls for no interference and is upheld. In the result the appeal is dismissed. Pronounced in the open court on 21.11.2008.
-
2008 (11) TMI 702 - ITAT DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... to point out any strong circumstance which can persuade us to take a different view on this issue. As far as the second contention of the learned Departmental Representative is concerned, we have gone through that alleged satisfaction. It is an office note and this very note was considered by the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Manoj Aggarwal vs. Dy. CIT (2008) 117 TTJ (Del)(SB) 145 (2008) 113 ITD 377 (Del)(SB). The Tribunal while considering this office note in para No. 126 has observed that it cannot be regarded as a satisfaction. We have also perused this office note. There is no reference of any seized material relatable to the assessee. It only talks about the general modus operandi of various persons in carrying out giving bogus accommodation entries. Therefore, taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances of the case, we allow this appeal of the assessee and quash the assessment order. 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.
-
2008 (11) TMI 701 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... ts notice on behalf of the respondent. Stay of recovery, in the meantime. Stand over for four weeks.
-
2008 (11) TMI 700 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ring the year on the amount of share capital contribution of the Government lying with State Bank of India, Silvassa Branch was exigible to tax in the hands of the Appellant? B. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the interest income had occured to the Appellant in its own right and that there was no diversion of income by way of overriding title?
-
2008 (11) TMI 699 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... e 24-12-2002 and 25-12-2002 (with no serial number of auction etc.) are found. Accordingly, I am of the opinion that in view of the fact that the purchases have been found entered in the books and that there is no adverse inference in respect of such purchases from the Assessing Officer and the fact that the books of account have not been rejected by the Assessing Officer, the addition made by the Assessing Officer of ₹ 2,11,150 ₹ 27,39,800 does not deserve to be sustained. Appellant gets a relief of ₹ 29,50,950. However, the additions of ₹ 38,400 and ₹ 76,000 are hereby confirmed in view of the stock having been found by the market authorities and no explanation forthcoming from the appellant’." 6. The Tribunal affirmed the above observations. 7. View taken in the said order is a possible view and is not shown to be perverse. We are unable to hold that the questions raised are substantial questions of law. 8. The appeal is dismissed.
-
2008 (11) TMI 698 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... of Closing Stock as per the method of accounting employed by the assessee? Insofar as the first set of questions are concerned, namely, (a ) to (c), we find that the Tribunal has adequately dealt with the same and has correctly applied the law. The Tribunal has held that the provisions of section 145A were not applicable to the proceedings of the year in question. It has also held that once the liability of customs duty has been incurred, it is admissible under section 43B in the year of demand. It is an admitted position that the customs duty was paid in the year in question. Therefore, the Tribunal's finding cannot be faulted. 3. As regards the second set of questions, namely, (d) and (e), the issues stand covered against the revenue and in favour of the assessee by the Supreme Court decision in the case of Berger Paints India Ltd. v. CIT 2004 266 ITR 99. 4. In view of the foregoing, no substantial question of law arises for our consideration. The appeal is dismissed.
-
2008 (11) TMI 697 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ng the age of superannuation or in the case of voluntary retirement on completion of qualifying service. The effect of resignation and retirement to the extent that there is severance of employment but in service jurisprudence both the expressions are understood differently. Under the Regulations, the expressions "resignation" and "retirement" have been employed for different purpose and carry different meanings..." 19. Mr. Vishwanathan is correct in his submission that the Division Bench committed a serious illegality insofar as it held that the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition on the ground of delay and laches. It did not do so. as it was not so, but having considered the merit of the matter in its entirety, we are of the opinion that no case has been made out for interference with the impugned judgment. The appeal is dismissed accordingly. In the facts and circumstances of the case, however, there shall be no order as to costs.
-
2008 (11) TMI 696 - ITAT AGRA
... ...
... ... ..... findings, the re-assessment order dated 27.01.2004 can be termed both erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue? (ii) Whether there is any justification in the action of Ld. CIT, Gwalior to modify the re-assessment order and withdrawing the deduction of ₹ 4,84,234/- granted u/s. 80IA of the Act by taking action u/s. 263 of the I.T. Act, 1961." 2. The learned Accountant Member had set aside the revisional order passed u/s. 263 of the Act and had allowed the appeal of the assessee. The learned Judicial Member, on the other hand, had dismissed the appeal of the assessee. The learned Third Member has agreed with the view taken by the learned Accountant Member and has answered both these questions in favour of the assessee by replying the same in the negative. In the light of the majority view, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed. 3. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. 4. The order pronounced in the open court on 28th November, 2008.
-
2008 (11) TMI 695 - SUPREME COURT
Detention order passed u/s 3(1)(i) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 - Whether the detenue’s right to make a representation against the order of detention, is hampered by non-supply of the particular document?
HELD THAT:- As rightly contended by ld counsel for the State the documents were read over and an endorsement to that effect has been made by the detenu. While examining whether non supply of a document would prejudice a detenu the Court has to examine whether the detenu would be deprived of making an effective representation in the absence of a document. Primarily, the copies which form the ground for detention are to be supplied and non supply thereof would prejudice to the detenu. But documents which are merely referred to for the purpose of narration of facts in that sense cannot be termed to be documents without the supply of which the detenu is prejudiced. The High Court has lost sight of the relevant factors and, therefore, the impugned order of the High Court is clearly unsustainable and is therefore set aside.
Considering the nature of the order of detention which is essentially preventive in character, it would be appropriate for the State Government and the detaining authority to consider whether there is any need to take the detenu back to detention for serving the remainder of the period of detention which was indicated in the order of detention. The exercise shall be undertaken within two months.
The appeal is allowed to the aforesaid extent.
-
2008 (11) TMI 694 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Pre-deposit - penalty - reduction in quantum of - Held that: - the Tribunal has taken lenient view in favour of the petitioner by asking him to deposit ₹ 2 crores - The learned counsel for the petitioner also failed to point out any financial hardship in order to substantiate his say that the amount of pre-deposit should be reduced - appeal rejected - decided against appellant.
-
2008 (11) TMI 693 - CESTAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... t of the amount demanded, I take up the appeal itself for final disposal. 2. The issue involved in the present appeal is regarding denial of cenvat credit in respect of service tax paid on canteen services run by the manufacturer. This issue has come up before the larger bench where the larger bench vide order A/217-218/08-SMB/CI dated 25.9.08 has held that such credit is admissible. In view of the same, I set aside the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) and allow the appeal.
-
2008 (11) TMI 692 - ITAT BANGALORE
... ...
... ... ..... isions of the Act. It is an accepted principle of interpretation of that beneficent provision should be liberally construed". o p /o p 4.1 As has been mentioned earlier, the facts of the appellant are similar to those pertaining in the cases before the Hon'ble ITAT cited above. Therefore, respectfully following the said decisions, the AO is directed to compute and allow the deduction u/s 10B in respect of profits of the EOU without setting off the losses of the non-EOU Units, as claimed by the appellant. o p /o p 5. After going through the order of the learned CIT(A), as extracted above and the decision relied on by the learned CIT(A), we do not find any infirmity in the order of the learned CIT(A), who has granted relief to the assessee as claimed. The grounds taken by the revenue do not have any force. We accordingly, dismiss the appeal filed by the revenue. It is ordered accordingly. o p /o p Order pronounced in the open court on the 21st November, 2008. o p /o p
-
2008 (11) TMI 691 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... ng before us, the petitioner has annexed extracts from assessment register to show certain entries on the basis of which it is argued that the family arrangement was acted upon. It appears, however, that none of these documents were produced before the High Court. In the circumstances, we permit the petitioner herein to move the High Court by way of review/clarification pointing out the documents which are now annexed to the additional affidavit dated 11.11.2008. Stand over for eight weeks.
-
2008 (11) TMI 690 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... clause (i) of sub-section (1) are discharged shall be forthwith made over or paid to the persons from whose custody the assets were seized." 8. There is no dispute that the seized articles belonged to the petitioner and in fact, in the order passed by the Income-tax Officer itself, this fact has been acknowledged. Even the person from whom the said articles were seized, took the same stand. 9. In such a situation, when there is no dispute about title of the petitioner to the seized goods, provisions of section 132B(3) of the Act cannot be applied. A procedural provision cannot defeat the substantive rights of a person. The said provision is intended to apply in case of dispute of title or absence of title and not when title of a party is undisputed. 10. Accordingly, we allow this petition and direct respondent No. 3 to return 10 kgs. of silver jewellery of the petitioner within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 11. The petition is disposed of.
........
|
