|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 141 to 160 of 925 Records
-
2013 (6) TMI 792 - ITAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... the assessee, specially when the evidence(s) being relied upon by the AO are inadequate, unestablished, inappropriate, and fail to prove the undisclosed investment in the name of the assessee. It has also been seen from the order of the CIT(A), that the CIT(A) noted that similar addition was made in the case of Avis Motors P. Ltd., as well, which, incidentally, was also deleted by CIT(A)-16, Mumbai vide his order dated 5.4.2010. These facts and finding of the CIT(A), also show that the additions were made based on third party material by the AO, which were without any basis or corroborated by any cogent fact. In the light of aforesaid facts and the case laws relied by the AR, the CIT(A) deleted the addition of ₹ 23,40,800/- made by the AO. 30. Considering the entire factual matrix, we are of the opinion, that the CIT(A) was correct in employing the facts and law to delete the addition, which we sustain. 31. In the result the appeal filed by the department is dismissed.
-
2013 (6) TMI 791 - ITAT AHMEDABAD
Whether the interest on NPA is chargeable to tax - Held that Mere characterisation of an account as a NPA would not by itself be sufficient to say that there is uncertainty as regards realizability of income or interest income thereon - accrual of interest is a matter of fact, to be decided on the basis of examination of the status of each party - grounds raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose
disallowance of deduction u/s80P(2)(d)in respect of dividend income from co-op banks - Held that assessee is required to furnish the correct status of the bank to establish that the provisio of Section 80P(2)(d) of the Act are applicable on the assessee being a primary agriculture credit society or a rural development bank - allowed for statistical purpose
-
2013 (6) TMI 790 - ITAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... 61), and which, as it appears, are in respect of prepaid expenses, as by way of advances paid to the employees, who had subsequently left their employment with the assessee. No findings in the matter have been issued by the authorities below. We have already indicated that the same to be on a different footing altogether, so that subject to the necessary verification as to the nature of the advance as well as the year in which the said loss stands incurred by the Assessing Officer (AO), we hold the same as deductible as business loss u/s.28(i) of the Act. Though it is the satisfaction of the assessing authority that is paramount, as the nature of the material signifying the period of incurring the loss would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case, the AO shall adopt a holistic approach in the matter. We decide accordingly. 5. In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on June 28, 2013.
-
2013 (6) TMI 789 - HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... . General Sales Tax Act, 1968/Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 and therefore, will have no application to the proceedings under the Income Tax Act. 3. It is not the case of the appellant that under the provisions of Income Tax Act, appropriate Authority has made distinction between Roller Flour Mills and Flour Mills/Rice Mills. As such, in absence thereof, we find no reason to differ from the opinion recorded by the Tribunal in paragraph 12 that the circular, pressed into service by the appellant, will be of no avail to the appellant. Hence, dismissed.
-
2013 (6) TMI 788 - ITAT CHENNAI
... ...
... ... ..... st. The authority to file and defend legal proceedings have been vested in the trustees under due authority of the other trustees. The list of the litigation for this purpose also comprises of Income Tax matters. All this make it clear that the present appellant, who is though son of the deceased assessee, has succeeded to neither his estate nor he is the nominated trustee. That being the case, he cannot be termed as legal representative of the deceased assessee for the purpose of the proceedings under the Act. Reliance in this regard is placed on the case law (supra) relied upon by the Revenue. We also find force in its plea that the trust being an aggrieved party, has not come in appeal against the CIT(Appeals)’s order . As a result of our discussion, we hold that the present appeal is not legally maintainable for want of valid locus in favour of the appellant. 11. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed. Order pronounced on Wednesday, the 19th of June, 2013, at Chennai.
-
2013 (6) TMI 787 - ITAT AHMEDABAD
... ...
... ... ..... c) of the Act. In the present case since all the necessary facts were furnished. It is well settled that assessment proceedings and penalty proceedings are separate and distinct and the finding in the assessment proceedings cannot be regarded as conclusive for the purposes of the penalty proceedings. In the case of Reliance Petro Products (supra) it has been held that “ a mere making of claim which is not sustainable in law, by itself, would not amount to furnishing of inaccurate particulars regarding income of the assessee. Such a claim made in return is not amounting to furnishing of inaccurate particulars”. Considering the totality of facts we are of the view that in the present case making of addition while framing assessment does not call for levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c). We thus cancel the penalty levied by the AO. Therefore, this ground of Assessee is allowed. 11. Thus the Appeal of the Assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in Open Court on 07- 06 - 2013.
-
2013 (6) TMI 786 - CESTAT NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... he present application was filed seeking reconsideration of the order dated 4.10.2012. Merits of the petitioner s claim for waiver of pre-deposit are pleaded in this application The stay application was disposed of on 4.10.2012 ex parte, since the petitioner failed to appear on the date scheduled for hearing of the stay application. Since the Miscellaneous Application No.4742/2012 filed thereafter was also rejected, we find no justification for consideration of the present Misc. Application. It is accordingly rejected. 3. It is stated by the petitioner that he has deposited Rs.1,50,000/- on 13.12.2012 and ₹ 1,57,003/- on 23.3.2013. These deposits do not however comply with the condition stipulated in the order dated 4.10.2012 , time for which was extended on 12.4.2012 until this date. 4. In the circumstances, since there is failure of the order of pre-deposit and transgression of the provisions of Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944, the appeal stands rejected.
-
2013 (6) TMI 785 - ITAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... r various heads, such as advertisements, carriage outward, repairs etc., out of total expenditure on car, interest on car loan etc., out of depreciation claimed on car, on account of staff welfare and also disallowance of the expenses incurred by the assessee in respect of M/s 2B Technologies. 14. The above additions were made by the AO on adhoc basis, which has been confirmed by the learned CIT(A). 15. After considering the submissions and perusing the material on record, we are of the view that if the total addition of ₹ 1 lakh is sustained, then that will meet the end of justice as the some of the additions were made for want of proper vouchers and whether they are for usage of the business or not. Therefore, we sustain the addition to ₹ 1 lakh against various additions made, which are raised through grounds No.5 to 10. 16. For the reasons aforementioned, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part. Order pronounced in the open court on this 19thday of June2013.
-
2013 (6) TMI 784 - ITAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... gal position. 21. We find that, as held by Hon’ble Bombay High court in the case of CIT VS. Saumya finance & Leasing Co. Pvt.Ltd, 300 ITR 422(Bom), what is material is that dividend is distributed in the relevant period and not the nature of dividend It is not really necessary that dividend must pertain to the relevant period itself. The assessee had paid interim dividend in this case and to that extent, considering that dividend was paid within relevant period, deduction ought to have been allowed. We accordingly uphold the grievance of the assessee and direct the Assessing Officer to grant relief in the light of our above observations. 22. Ground No.4 is thus allowed in the above terms” In this view of the situation since quantum has already been deleted, we do not find any substance in the appeal filed by the revenue and the same is dismissed. 5. In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 10/06/2013 .
-
2013 (6) TMI 783 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Benefit under Section 10B - Tribunal [2010 (9) TMI 1093 - ITAT HYDERABAD] allowing claim - Held that:- This appeal is not required to be admitted, as the learned Tribunal has not done anything wrong, either on facts or law, while following its earlier decision in the same assessee’s case.Since nowhere it is suggested that the aforesaid earlier decision of the Tribunal has not been accepted or that an appeal has been preferred against the said decision, we do not see any reason to interfere with the order impugned and hence, the appeal is liable to be dismissed.
-
2013 (6) TMI 782 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ization which demand is co-terminus with the period of authorization. As such, demand has a rational nexus to the object of Section 4 of KMVT Act. Hence, it cannot be said that demand made by the respondent authorities is contrary to the statutory provisions particularly, section 4 of the Act as sought to be contended by learned advocate appearing for petitioner. The reasonableness of such taxation cannot be tested on the ground that it would adversely affect the business interest of petitioner and for this proposition, judgment in the case of MALWA BUS SERVICE vs STATE OF PUNJAB reported in (1983) 3 SCC 237 can be looked up. 17. In that view of the matter, I am of the considered view that demand raised by respondent- authorities calling upon the petitioner to pay tax on yearly basis as per endorsement dated 07.05.2013 - Annexure-B cannot be held as without authority of law. 18. In the result, following order is passed Writ petition is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs.
-
2013 (6) TMI 781 - ITAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... ut was directly credited to the capital account in the balance sheet. Learned CIT(A) has held that the mesne profit is not revenue receipt but capital in nature because while deciding the ground on merit, the receipt has been found as capital in nature in view of the decision of the Special bench. Since the mesne profit is in capital in nature in view of the decision of the Special Bench, ITA No.8185/2011 therefore, they cannot be brought to tax under Section 115JB of the Act. Even the Explanation 2 to Section 115JB supports the case of the assessee. Therefore, in view of the above facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the reasoning given by the learned CIT(A), we hold that the learned CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition computed by the AO under Section 115JB. Accordingly, in this regard, the order of the learned CIT(A) is confirmed. 12. In the result, appeal of the department is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on this19thday of Jun.2013.
-
2013 (6) TMI 780 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... 965, issued by CBDT, wherein it is made clear that where it is proposed to estimate the profit and prescribed particular have been furnished by the assessee, the depreciation allowance should be separately worked out. In all such cases, the gross profit should be estimated and the deductions and allowances including depreciation allowance should be separately deducted from the gross profit. The said circular of CBDT was examined by the Rajasthan High Court in CIT vs. Jain Construction Co., and others (2000) 245 ITR 527 and found that depreciation and payment of interest have to be allowed separately while estimating the profit. Following the said judgment, the learned Tribunal came to the opinion that the depreciation has to be allowed separately. In view of the aforesaid finding of the learned Tribunal, we are of the opinion that this matter does not call for interference by this Court and the appeal is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. No costs.
-
2013 (6) TMI 779 - ITAT AHMEDABAD
... ...
... ... ..... ingh Kalra Vs. ITO, ITA No.3553/Del/2011 dated 26.10.2012, and a decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of C. Packirisamy Vs. ACIT, 315 ITR 293, but the natural justice demands that a clear finding should first be on facts that whether there was return of loan in respect of impugned entries. For that purpose, the assessee is duty bound to discharge the primary onus as prescribed under law. While restoring back this issue to the stage of the assessment, we hereby specifically direct these appellants to suo motto appear before the AO within 30 days on receipt of this order of the Tribunal alongwith requisite information without waiting for any notice of hearing from the side of the Revenue department. However, the AO is at liberty to proceed with the assessment proceedings as per law. With these directions, this ground may be treated as allowed for statistical purpose. 12. In the result, all the eleven appeals may be treated as allowed for statistical purpose.
-
2013 (6) TMI 778 - ITAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... probability of the size of the coin, cost of the coin placed in the handset as discussed above looks all the more unreasonable making assessee’s claim suspicious. Even though assessee did pay the amount to Opal Industries by way of cheque, nothing was established that the said party supplied gold coins and assessee had placed them in the handset as a part of advertisement and marketing and the advertisement scheme was a genuine scheme to be accepted as such. Even though the learned Counsel tried to justify the claim by furnishing various rejoinders, details etc., the crucial aspects are left unanswered and therefore, we are not convinced about the claim of assessee. We therefore, upheld the orders of AO and the CIT (A) on the issue to the extent of claim of ₹ 4,77,58,412 on distribution of gold coins and assessee’s grounds are accordingly rejected. 17. In the result appeal filed by assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 12th June, 2013
-
2013 (6) TMI 777 - ITAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... judicial to the interest of revenue so as to empower the CIT to revise such assessment order u/s 263. The scope of proceedings u/s 263 is confined to cases in which the assessment order is not only erroneous but also prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. If an issue is found to be settled in assessee’s favour, then the CIT can not pass revisional order. Similarly if an issue is debatable, in the sense that two possible views exist on the issue and the AO has followed one of such legally possible views, then also the CIT cannot exercise his jurisdiction u/s 263 on this point. In view of the availability of the afore-said order passed by the Mumbai Bench in the case of Mahindra & Mahindra (supra), we are of the considered opinion that the learned CIT was not correct in setting aside the assessment order by holding it to be erroneous. The impugned order is, therefore, vacated. In the result, the appeal is allowed. Order pronounced on this 28th day of June, 2013.
-
2013 (6) TMI 776 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Addition u/s 14A - Held that:- When the very basis for employing Section 14A of the Act on factual matrix is lacking, the disallowance to the extent of 10% of dividend income was not permissible. When it transpires from record that the assessee's own funds were at higher, then the investment made by it and with nothing to indicate that the borrowed funds were utilised for the purpose of investment in shares and for earning dividends, the Tribunal committed no error in disallowing the sum of ₹ 1,14,43,040/-.
As far as other administrative expenses are concerned, the Revenue had requested to restore the matter back to the Assessing Officer. However, to put an end to the entire dispute with regard to other expenses, the assessee permitted disallowance of ₹ 5 lakh. The Tribunal considering the volume and quantum of investment disallowed the said amount of ₹ 5 lakh, which though is on estimated basis, it is a reasonable base and, therefore, the first question merits no consideration.
Allowance of Corporate Debt Restructuring expenses - Held that:- Once the expenditure is held to be revenue in nature incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business, it can be allowed in its entirety in the year in which it is incurred. However, considering the the decision in the case of Madras Industrial Investment Corporation Ltd. (1997 (4) TMI 5 - SUPREME Court ), when the spreading is done for over a period of six years and as the assessee-respondent has no objection to such revenue expenditure being spread out, though it could have insisted for this amount allowed in the year under consideration, with no such objection having been raised, the Revenue would not succeed in this issue as the expenditure is held to be revenue in nature.
Waver of principal amount of loan - Held that:- Amount of loan waived by the Financial Institution cannot be brought to tax as appellant's income u/s.28(iv) and/or sec.41(1) of I.T. Act. Addition is deleted
Addition under Section 115JB being the expenditure estimated on earning of dividend income under Section 14A - Held that:- The addition under Section 115JB of the Act of a sum of ₹ 1,14,43,040/- when was made as an expenditure estimated on earning of dividend income under Section 14A of the Act, without reiterating the rationale of confirming deletion of such amount as has been elaborately done at the time of deciding question No.1, this deletion requires to be confirmed.
-
2013 (6) TMI 775 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... r has not completed the investigation. It is also the submission of the learned counsel that, in an identical situation this Court, by Annexure-G order, recording the submission of the learned Public Prosecutor, disposed Crl.M.C.No.3828 of 2012 with a direction to the officer concerned to file final report within a period of three weeks. 4. The learned Public Prosecutor on instruction submitted that some more time is required to complete the investigation. 5. On considering the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Public Prosecutor, according to me, this petition can be disposed of with a direction to the Excise Inspector concerned to complete the investigation without any further delay. In the result, this Crl.M.C. is disposed of directing the Excise Inspector, Kunnamangalam Excise Range to expedite the investigation in C.R.No.14 of 2013 of that Excise Range and submit a report in the court concerned as expeditiously as possible.
-
2013 (6) TMI 774 - CESTAT MUMBAI
Classification of goods - parts of illuminated glow sign boxes - classified under CTH 94 or 49? - Held that: - The Tribunal in its own case i.e. M/s.Tanzeem Screenarts [2005 (12) TMI 135 - CESTAT, MUMBAI] held that where the printed plastic sheets are cleared along with the part of glow signs are held to be classifiable under Chapter heading 94.05 of the Central Excise Tariff - In the present case as the proprietor of M/s. Tanzeem Screenarts in her statement specifically admitted that the plastic sheets are cleared along with the other parts of glow sign - the goods in question are classifiable under Chapter 94 of the Central Excise Tariff - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant-assessee.
-
2013 (6) TMI 773 - CESTAT CHENNAI
... ...
... ... ..... y deposited an amount of ₹ 15.00 lakhs and due to acute financial crisis of the Company they failed to deposit the balance amount in time. He submits that further six months time may be allowed for compliance of the stay order. 3. After considering the submissions of the Ld. Counsel, we extend the period of compliance for eight weeks and report compliance on 06.09.2013. 4. The miscellaneous application is disposed of. (Order dictated and pronounced in the open Court)
............
|
