Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Shri Udai Kant Mishra Versus The DCIT, Central Circle-3, Jaipur

Determining any unexplained jewellery in the hands of the appellant - circular no. 1916 - non-granting of relief as per CBDT Circular in respect of the jewellery belonging to the married female - Held that:- CIT (A) has not given any reason for denying the benefit/set off to the extent of 250 gms in case of Aditi Mishra and Aanchal Mishra (minor grand-daughters) and partly allowing the benefit to the extent of 250 gms to Smt. Roshni Mishra. We find that the case of the assessee is covered by the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

o allow gold jewellery weighing 250 gms [(500gms 250 gms allowed by CIT (A)] in the hands of Roshni Mishra (daughter-in-law), 250 gms. each in the hands of Aditi Mishra and Aanchal Mishra (minor grand-daughter) - Decided in favour of assessee. - Disallowance of interest expense - Held that:- The assessee was having sufficient own funds as reflected in the capital account of the assessee as on 31.03.2008 so as to make investment for purchase of shares of other companies and generate exempt .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

as raised the following grounds of appeal :- 1. In law and in facts and in the circumstances of the appellant s case, the learned CIT (A), Central, Jaipur having considered the validity of the department circular no. 1916 whilst determining any unexplained jewellery in the hands of the appellant has grossly erred in allowing partial relief to the appellant instead of total relief and hence the ld. CIT (A) ought to have allowed total credit of jewellery available to the appellant. 2. In law and i .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ren as bonafidely claimed by the appellant whilst explaining the total jewellery, the ld. CIT (A) ought to have therefore allowed the claim of the minor children available as per the said circular which he had grossly failed to take into consideration. 3. Without prejudice, in law and in facts of the case, the learned CIT (A) should have allowed the relief to the extent of 500 grams of jewellery as available to married lady as per the circular whilst deciding any unexplained jewellery. 4. In law .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s notional interest though in facts of the case there was no justification for confirming the same. The ld. CIT (A) should have deleted the same. 5.2. Without prejudice, in law and in facts and in the circumstances of the appellant s case, the learned CIT (A), Central, Jaipur has grossly erred in confirming the impugned addition by invoking the provision of section 14A of the Act when the assessing officer had not invoked the said provision. The impugned addition is therefore ultra virus, and ba .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ents were found and seized. The assessee filed his e-return declaring total income of ₹ 1,05,32,110/-. The AO framed the assessment under section 153A/143(3) of the Act vide order dated 24.12.2009 by making additions on account of deemed dividend income, Unexplained jewellery and on account of Disallowance of Interest and assessed the total income of ₹ 1,26,32,909/-. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before ld. CIT (A), who after considering the submissions, partly allowed .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

and Anchal Mishra and 500 grams of jewellery in the hands of Roshni Mishra in accordance with the CBDT Circular No. 1916 as no jewellery was recorded in their names in the books. This is evident from the chart submitted to the lower authorities, in this regard, also reproduced by the ld. CIT (A) in her order at page 5. 3.2. In not providing full credit in the hands of Smt. Roshni Mishra of the jewellery, lower authorities have wrongly taken shelter of the below mentioned points :- 3.2.i. Her Sta .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e of minor grand-daughters was irrelevant. 3.4. CBDT Circular No. 1916, looking to the Indian social circumstances, allows blanket benefit of 500 grams per married lady and 250 grams per unmarried lady, without considering any other parameter. 3.5. It is submitted that where jewellery found in possession of assessee s family was personal wearing of ladies and if the same is within permissible limit stipulated by CBDT Circular, no addition can be made by the Income Tax Authorities. For this propo .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ated that these were personal wearing jewellery and same were received by ladies/daughter-in-law on/or at time of their marriage either from parental side or in-laws side - Revenue could not place any material to show otherwise than that stipulated in CBDT Circular 1916, dated 11.5.1994 which states that if jewellery found in possession of a married lady, unmarried lady and male member of family is to extent of 500 gms., 250 gms and 100 gms. Each, officials would not question source and acquisit .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

. Per contra, the ld. D/R opposed the submissions. 3.3. We have heard rival contentions, perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. The ld. CIT (A) has not given any reason for denying the benefit/set off to the extent of 250 gms in case of Aditi Mishra and Aanchal Mishra (minor grand-daughters) and partly allowing the benefit to the extent of 250 gms to Smt. Roshni Mishra. We find that the case of the assessee is covered by the CBDT Circular N .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ing 250 gms [(500gms - 250 gms allowed by CIT (A)] in the hands of Roshni Mishra (daughter-in-law), 250 gms. each in the hands of Aditi Mishra and Aanchal Mishra (minor grand-daughter). The grounds of the assessee are allowed. 4. Ground Nos. 5 & 6 relates to disallowance of interest expense of ₹ 10,56,769/-. 4.1. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has reiterated the submissions as made in the written brief. The submissions of the assessee are reproduced as under :- 3.1. It is submitted t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

hich had the potention of generating exempt income, was made from the personal books in which business loan was taken by the assessee. Interest expense on such loan amount, incurred during the relevant previous year, amounting to ₹ 1,30,061/-. 3.3. thus entire investment had been made by the assessee, in shares of the companies, out of his own funds. Disallowance made by the lower authorities is on completely wrong appreciation of facts. 3.4. Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of Relian .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

bsequently laid down by the Hon ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Hitachi Home and Life Solutions (I) Ltd. (2014) 221 Taxman 109 (Gujarat)(MAG.) and by Hon ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Microlabs Ltd. (2016) 383 ITR 490 (Karn.)(HC). 3.6. It is submit6ted that the assessee himself was engaged in the business of Real Estate wherein he acted as a broker for executing real estate deals. It is undisputed that investment made by the assessee was in to companies also engaged in Real Estat .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

received. In the case at hand, no dividend income has been received by the assessee during the relevant previous year. The said fact has also been acknowledged by the ld. CIT (A) in her order at para 6.3(ii) page 10. Under such scenario, no disallowance under section 14A can be made. Reliance is placed on the following judicial pronouncements :- CIT vs. Holcim India (P) Ltd. (2014) 272 CTR 282 (Delhi) CIT vs. Shivam Motors (P) Ltd. (2014) 272 CTR 277 (Allahabad) CIT vs. Lakhani Marketing Inc. ( .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     Latest Happenings     ↓  

News: Notification Issued For GST Actionable Claim On Branded Food Products

News: GST Refund - Blockage of Working Capital of Exporters - earlier also there was a normal blockage of funds for a period of 5-6 months at least

News: Clarification about Transition Credit - ₹ 1.27 lakh crore of credit of Central Excise and Service Tax was lying as closing balance as on 30th June, 2017 - claim of credit of ₹ 65,000 crore is not unexpected

Article: 20 Things You must know about E Way Bills in GST Law

Article: MISTAKES IN DRAFTING

Forum: Duty Drawback- Urgent

Highlight: The Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 2017 and All Industry Rates (AIRs) of Drawback related changes -reg. - Circular

Highlight: The definition of "subsidiary company" or "subsidiary" u/s 2(87) of the Companies Act, 2013 shall come into force w.e.f. 20-9-2017

Highlight: Central Government notified the All Industry Rates of Duty Drawback Schedule w.e.f. 1.10.2017 - Notification

Notification: All Industry Rates of Duty Drawback Schedule w.e.f. 1.10.2017

Circular: Investment by Foreign Portfolio Investors in Corporate Debt Securities Review

Notification: Exemptions on supply of services under UTGST Act

Notification: Rates for supply of services under UTGST Act

Notification: Exemptions on supply of services under IGST Act

Notification: Rates for supply of services under IGST Act

Notification: List of Exempted supply of services under the CGST Act

Notification: Rates for supply of services under CGST Act

Highlight: Acceptance of deposits by companies from its members - conditions relaxed in case of Specified IFSC Public company and a private company - Rule 3 amended

Notification: Rate of exchange of conversion of the foreign currency with effect from 8th September, 2017

News: Tax Payers Advised To Confirm Identities Of Income Tax Search Authorities

Notification: Amendment in Appendix 3 (SCOMET items) to Schedule- 2 of ITC (HS) Classification of Export and Import Items 2012

Forum: GST Invoice

Notification: The Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 2017

Circular: The Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 2017 and All Industry Rates (AIRs) of Drawback related changes -reg.

News: GST implementation smoother than expected: Jaitley

Forum: GST - TRAN1 - filed - Data uploaded with Remarks Processed with Error - Not coming in Electronic credit ledger - need suggession guidance

Forum: 3B mistake

Forum: Input tax credit

Forum: Excise duty credit on finished stock at additional place of business.

Forum: Due date of Filing TRAN-1

Highlight: Diversion of income at source - Joint venture agreement - 97% of the receipt transfer to M/s TRG Industries (P) Ltd. - scope of the agreement - it is diversion by overriding title - not taxable in the hands of assessee - HC

Highlight: Expenditure on eligible projects or schemes u/s 35AC - After 01.04.2017 the legislature desired to withdraw such deduction. - The Union legislature was competent to introduce such amendment - HC

Highlight: Transfer of trading assets at cost price, the profit component also stood transferred to the outgoing Directors, which otherwise belonged to the Company - the fact that AO has made the addition in the hands of the Directors would not make any difference - additions confirmed - HC

Highlight: The interest u/s 234B of the Act cannot go beyond the stage of S.245D(I) before the Settlement Commission - HC

Highlight: Galvanized iron pipe is a different commercial commodity than a iron pipe, therefore the activity of galvanization in our considered opinion amounts to manufacture - Deduction u/s 80-IB allowed - HC

Highlight: Penalty u/s 271C - non deduction of TDS on interest paid to sister concerns in terms of Section 194A - Levy of penalty confirmed - HC

Highlight: Disallowance of interest - reference to section 179 - The legislature has also recognised, that the doctrine of lifting of veil in the matter of tax dues is to be applied to prevent fraud etc. and not where the company has suffered despite its normal bona fide function. - HC

News: RBI Reference Rate for US $

Notification: Amendment in Notification No. S.O. 3118(E), dated the 3rd October, 2016

Highlight: Discount on ESOP to be allowed as business expenditure u/s 37(1), during the years of vesting on the basis of percentage of vesting during such period, subject to upward or downward adjustment at the time of exercise of option.

Notification: Central Government appoints the 20th September, 2017 as the date on which proviso to clause (87) of section 2 of the Companies Act 2013, shall come into force

Notification: Companies (Restriction on number of layers) Rules, 2017

Highlight: Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - additional income disclosure - surrender of income post survey u/s 133A - he disclosure made by the assessee is voluntary in nature, in the revised return - no penalty

Highlight: Reopening of assessment - notice u/s 148 issued on the directions of JCIT / CIT - a perusal of reasons for initiating reassessment proceedings clearly show that they are against the sprit of provisions u/s 147

Highlight: MAT - Adjustment to book profit - computation u/clause (f) of Explanation-1 to section 115JB(2) is to be made without resorting to the computation as contemplated u/s 14A r.w.Rule 8D of I.T. Rules.

Highlight: Addition on account of alleged suppression of service value received - the addition made simply believing the Form 26AS will be an arbitrary exercise of power which cannot be sustained

Notification: Exempts intra state supply of heavy water and nuclear fuels from DAE to NPCIL

Notification: Seeks to amend notification No. 12/2017-UTT(R) to exempt right to admission to the events organised under FIFA U-17 World Cup 2017

Notification: Seeks to amend notification No. 11/2017- UTT(R) to reduce CGST rate on specified supplies of Works Contract Services

Highlight: Liability to pay duty on import of software - Though no authorization was given by the appellant to DHL, it is an undisputed position that the software has, in fact, been ordered by the appellant and have been delivered to them by DHL - the appellant is to be considered as the importer



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version