|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 41 to 60 of 194 Records
-
1982 (9) TMI 185 - ITAT PUNE
... ...
... ... ..... d further whether he demanded cash payment only and whether payment by cash would not have been accepted by the assessee s son. Since the ITO did not take pains to examine the son of the assessee, merely because the payment exceeds Rs. 2,500 it cannot be straight away stated that the payment made by the assessee is not genuine. Such hasty conclusion or inference in uncalled for. At the cost of repetition it must be said that the party who supplied the goods is living person, the person has got a shop in Sadashiv Peth, Pune that person has also in his books of accounts entries of blouse piece sold to the assessee and that the son of the assessee in fact received the amount of Rs. 54,800. Taking the cumulative effect of all these things one has to come to the conclusion and that too, irresistible one, that payment made by the assessee is a genuine one. Therefore, we delete the addition made by the ITO and sustained by the AAC. 7. In the result, the assessee s appeal is allowed.
-
1982 (9) TMI 184 - ITAT PUNE
... ...
... ... ..... rat High Court decision in the case of Kartikey V. Sarabhai in spite of the fact that there was a prior decision of the Madras High Court in the case of D. Kanniah Pillai (1976) 104 ITR 520 (Mad), we may state that the Madras High Court decision in the case of D. Kanniah Pillai was not dealing with the question of extinguishment of rights. It was considering the question whether in the circumstances the transaction resulted in a sale within the meaning of the Sale of Goods Act. The only decision on the subject of extinguishment of rights within the meaning of s. 2(47) of the IT Act is that of the Gujarat High Court in the case of Kartikey V. Sarabhai (1981) 24 CTR (Guj) 184 (1981) 131 ITR 42 (Guj). In our opinion, therefore, there does not appear to be anything wrong in the ITAT, Special Bench, Delhi following the Gujarat High Court decision. 13. In the result, the AAC rsquo s order is reversed and the ITO rsquo s order is restored. The appeal filed by the revenue is allowed.
-
1982 (9) TMI 183 - ITAT PUNE
... ...
... ... ..... e could ascertain. On behalf of the Revenue, it is submitted that the ITO s action was fully justified inasmuch as the assessee has concealed particulars of his income. On behalf of the assessee, however, the appeal filed by the Revenue is resisted on the ground that even in the reassessment proceedings the ITO has not been able to bring further concealment of particulars of income on record. Same particulars as were filed in the original balance-sheet have been re-evaluated. This is mere change of opinion. 6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that the AAC was fully justified in vacating the action under s. 147(a) on the ground that what the ITO had done was merely re-evaluation of the balance-sheet on record which was not permitted under s. 147(a). Since we are upholding the AAC s order vacating the action under s. 147(a), we see no reason to go into merits of the case. 7. In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed.
-
1982 (9) TMI 182 - ITAT PUNE
... ...
... ... ..... view of the picture how the partner Nazaralli was entitled to draw monies from his account. 3. We have carefully considered the facts and circumstances of the case. As stated earlier, the facts lie within a very narrow compass. The assessee has withdraw money from the Bank of Maharashtra, Pune, an overdraft in respect of which interest has been paid to the bank. This money has not been utilised by the assessee-firm for the purposes of its business, but for the purposes of advancing it to Smt. Rashida, daughter of partner Shri Nazaralli, for purchase of a flat. This is not for the purpose of the business of the assessee-firm. In our opinion, the ITO was fully justified in disallowing the claim for interest to the extent of advance made to Smt. Rashida for non-business purposes out of the monies with-drawn from the Bank. The ITO s order requires to be reinstated. The order of the CIT(A) is reversed and the ITO s order is reinstated. The appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed.
-
1982 (9) TMI 181 - ITAT PUNE
... ...
... ... ..... st of Supreme Court it does not come in the way of the assessee s claim. 16. Regarding the disallowance of Rs. 1,756, as already stated by Shri Bhide that the expenditure was incurred over tea, coffee, etc., over the persons who were concerned with the assessee s business. On that account, it is not possible to give details and therefore simply for want of details the assessee s claim cannot be rejected. However, the ratio of the Kolhapur Sugar Mills (1979) 119 ITR 387 (Bom) is not applicable to the facts of the case in hand. On the contrary, there is a decision of the Tribunal in ITA No. 901/PN/76-77 for asst. yr. 1973-74 in favour of the assessee and therefore I see no justification to disallow the assessee s claim. The cases relied upon by the ld. departmental representative are distinguishable on facts and I hold that the expenditure incurred by the assessee is not in the nature of entertainment. Since the assessee has succeeded on both the grounds, the appeal is allowed.
-
1982 (9) TMI 180 - ITAT PUNE
... ...
... ... ..... er that can be seen from cash book (which is lying with you). From cash book the sales of 6 switches can be seen on the following dates 1. Cash book dt. 30-11-1974 piece 1 Main switch sale 2. -do- 3-12-1974 -do- -do- 3. -do- 6-12-1974 -do- -do- 4. -do- 10-10-1975 -do- -do- 5. -do- 31-10-1975 -do- -do- 6. -do- 1-11-1975 -do- -do- . . . Total 6 . In regular books of accounts the purchase of 122 pieces shown in correct and also closing stock of 10 pieces. Therefore, Rs. 360 of 6 pieces is not undisclosed and also not understatement of closing stock of Rs. 360. The addition of Rs. 720 is totally unwarranted. From the above explanation it could be seen that all the alleged discrepancies noticed by the AAC are not discrepancies in fact, but are made due to some misunderstandings on the part of the AAC. The addition of Rs. 5, 099 made by the AAC is clearly on some misunderstandings and requires to be vacated. The addition is accordingly vacated. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1982 (9) TMI 179 - ITAT PUNE
... ...
... ... ..... r advice on such techniques or methods (iii) such other goods, services or facilities, as may be prescribed. Details of the expenses furnished by the assessee do not indicate that either processing expenses or the godown expenses or the inspection fees claimed by it for weighted deduction under s. 35C could fall under any of the categories mentioned under s. 35C of the IT Act. In our opinion, therefore, the CIT (A) had positively erred in allowing the assessee s claim for relief under s. 35C in respect of the processing expenses for all the five years, inspection fees for the first three years and godown expenses for the last two years under consideration. Since the ITO has himself allowed the godown expenses for the asst. yr. 1976-77, we see no reason to interfere with the order of the CIT (A) in this respect. In respect of the other items under appeal, the order of the CIT(A) is reversed and the order of the ITO is reinstated. The as filed by the Revenue are hereby allowed.
-
1982 (9) TMI 178 - ITAT PUNE
... ...
... ... ..... y model sold . The ld. Departmental representative has pointed out that as per the terms of the agreement, the ownership of the assets remained with the foreigner. In terms of this clause, the assessee was therefore not eligible for depreciation in respect of this asset. On behalf of the assessee, it has been clarified that the ownership would return to the foreigner on the effective cancellation of the agreement as a result of the violation by the licensee, i.e., the assessee, of some of the vital terms of the agreement. Only in such circumstances, the ownership will revert to the assessee. Otherwise, for all intents and purpose the assessee was the owner of the know-how. In the light of this clarification, in our opinion, the CIT (A) was fully justified in applying the Gujarat High Court decision in the case of Elecon Engg. Co. Ltd. as supplemented by the Bombay High Court decision in the case of Emco Electro Pvt. Ltd. 4. The appeal filed by the Revenue is hereby dismissed.
-
1982 (9) TMI 164 - ITAT PUNE
Assessment Year, Carry Forward, Revised Return, Set On ... ... ... ... ..... on 139(4) which has not been acted upon by the ITO on the one hand and the assessee has failed to comply with a notice under section 148 on the other hand. We do not see how on the one hand the assessee could file an appeal on the basis of a mere return filed under section 139(4) with no order passed on the same by the ITO or on the other successfully file an appeal against an order under section 143(3) read with section 147 against the clear ratio of the Supreme Court decision in Anglo-French Textile s case. From either point of view, we have no hesitation in coming to the conclusion that the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) has to be cancelled. 12. The two decisions of the Tribunal to which reference was made by the learned counsel for the assessee do not help him insofar as the present dispute was not in issue before those cases and the assessees did not take inconsistent stands as in the present case. 13. For statistical purposes, the departmental appeal is allowed.
-
1982 (9) TMI 161 - ITAT NAGPUR
... ...
... ... ..... was faintly urged that under cl. (C) the interest in the joint family property of the lineal descendants of the deceased member, in the case of a property consisting of coparcenary interest in the joint family property of a Hindu Family governed by the Mitakshara are was liable to be included. In our opinion, cl. (C) will not apply to those properties which are covered by the exclusionary provision in cl.(a). Properties which are exempt from estate duty under the mentioned clauses of s. 33(1) go outside the purview of the aggregation for determining the rate. Such properties cannot be taken into consideration even if the consist of a coparcenary interest. In other words cl. (a) will not apply to those properties which are specifically exempt under cl. (a) of s. 34. In the result, the position is that even for rate purposes the value of the lineal descendants share in the residential house cannot be included. Respectfully following this decision we allow the assessee s appeal.
-
1982 (9) TMI 158 - ITAT MADRAS-D
... ...
... ... ..... ution of the firm. We are also not mad assessment aware of any of the other rules in the IT Rules or form prescribed that are violated by the assessee. It is stated by the ITO that it is incumbent on the part of the firm to first divide the profits for the relevant years among it s partners in their respective profit sharing ratio and that it is clear that this condition has not been satisfied in that the accounts have been mad erupt a due before the date on which the accounts have to be closed according to the partnership deed. We fail to see how by a change in the accounting year this condition of sharing profits in the respective profit sharing ratio has been violated. Even if the accounting year is 11th Nov., 1976 the extent of profits available till then had been shared only according to the profit sharing ratio specified in the partnership deed. We found no ground to refuse registration. 6. Appeal allowed. The ITO is directed to ground registration to the assessee-firm.
-
1982 (9) TMI 157 - ITAT MADRAS-D
... ...
... ... ..... yment nor has he doubted the rendering of service to the aforesaid assessee. If members of an AOP were paid salary for services rendered, the claim cannot be disallowed for the reason that such payment would amount to self. The dictum laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Jitmal Bhurmal vs. CIT reported in (1962) 44 ITR 887 (SC) and in the case of Jugal Kishore Baldeo Sahai vs. CIT reported in (1967) 63 ITR 238 (SC) supports the above view. I find also that for the immediately preceding asst. yr. 1976-77, a total salary claim of Rs. 5,419 was allowed by the revenue. For the year under appeal viz. 1977-78 apart from the claim of Rs. 6,000 under dispute there was no other claim for salary to any other person. Having regard to the circumstances of the case, I am of the vie Wealth- tax that there is no justification either on fact or on law to disallow the claim for deduction of Rs. 6,000. The disallowance is accordingly set aside. 6. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1982 (9) TMI 154 - ITAT MADRAS-D
... ...
... ... ..... unt in the next year, as pointed out by CIT (A) would show that both these accounts are one and the same. Therefore, the combined effect of the maintenance of these two accounts is that the assessee had drawn money which would cover the instalment in question from the said company. It is, therefore, not possible for the assessee to contend that money had not been withdrawn. We, therefore, hold that the assessee is liable to tax on the sum of Rs. 50,000. This contention of the assessee is thus rejected. 21. In the appeal filed by the Revenue, the sole point raised was whether the CIT (A) should not have declined to enhance the assessment. For the reasons discussed above, we hold that the CIT (A) is justified in rejecting to enhance the income. We, therefore, up hold his order and dismiss the departmental appeal. 22. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for the asst. yr. 1976-77 is partly allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue for asst. yr. 1977-78 is dismissed.
-
1982 (9) TMI 152 - ITAT MADRAS-D
Accounting Year, In Part, Partnership Deed ... ... ... ... ..... ion of the firm. We are also not made aware of any of the other rules in the Income-tax Rules, 1962, or forms prescribed that are violated by the assessee. It is stated by the ITO that it is incumbent on the part of the firm to first divide the profits for the relevant years among its partners in their respective profit sharing ratio and that it is clear that this condition has not been satisfied in that the accounts have been made up to a date before the date on which the accounts have to be closed according to the partnership deed. We fail to see how by a change in the accounting year this condition of sharing profits in the respective profit sharing ratio has been violated. Even if the accounting year is 11-11-1976, the extent of profits available till then had been shared only according to the profit sharing ratio specified in the partnership deed. We found no ground to refuse registration. 6. Appeal allowed. The ITO is directed to grant registration to the assessee-firm.
-
1982 (9) TMI 150 - ITAT MADRAS-C
... ...
... ... ..... from anyone and the interest was paid only because of the obligation of the minor to advance the funds or because it was like any other loan taken from an outsider. In the present case, from the facts on record, it is clear that the interest was paid because the firm borrowed funds of the minor and not because the minors were bound to keep their share of profits or their own funds with firm. In the circumstances, the interest accruing from such deposits accrued, because of a normal relationship of creditor and debtor and not because of the admission of the minors to the benefits of the partnership. Hence, the interest accrued could not be regarded, as the benefits arising from the partnership which could be added u/s. 64(1) (iii) to the income of the parent. Accordingly, we set aside the orders of the authorities below and direct the ITO to recompute the income of the assessee excluding the interest accruing to the minors from the deposits in the firms. The appeal is allowed.
-
1982 (9) TMI 149 - ITAT MADRAS-C
... ...
... ... ..... rom the letting of the said machinery plant or furniture the income from such letting if it is not chargeable to income tax under the head lsquo profits and gains of business or profession is chargeable under the residuary head of income from other sources. We are therefore satisfied that in the circumstances of the income derived from letting out of the lodging house belonging to the assessee as a co-owner should be in accordance with the provision of S. 56 to 58 under the head income from other sources and no part of the amount received by way of rent is chargeable under the head income from house property. We therefore set aside the orders of the departmental authorities and direct them to recompute the income under the head of income from other sources in ss. 56 to 58 of the IT Act. The parties agreed that it is not necessary for us to consider the different items of expenses and deductions claimed by the departmental authorities. The assessee rsquo s appeals are allowed.
-
1982 (9) TMI 148 - ITAT MADRAS-C
... ...
... ... ..... 0 to the assessee is a gift. If so, it is not income of the assessee. What is income by way of gift is certainly not the income of the recipient. So Rs. 16,000 has to be excluded form assessment. 6. In any event, it may be exempt u/s 10(10B) of the Act. For an amount to be retrenchment compensation inn the hands of the recipient, it need not be traceable to Industrial Disputes act or any other Act or Rules, orders of notifications issued thereunder or under any standing order or any award or contract of service. A receipt otherwise than these sources enumerated can also be retrenchment compensation. If it is retrenchment compensation then the extent of amount exempt will have to be determined. But as I am holding that Rs. 16,000 is not the income of the assessee, I am not going into the question of exemption under retrenchment compensation. 7. Appeal allowed Rs. 16,000 received by the assessee is not assessable as income of the assessee. It has to be excluded from assessment.
-
1982 (9) TMI 147 - ITAT MADRAS-C
... ...
... ... ..... the profit and loss account is for the period 1st April, 1970 to 31st March, 1977. what we find is that the method of accounting followed by the assessee has been accepted by the department. The CIT(A) in the paragraphs cited supra, has accepted the position that from the method employed by the assessee the income can properly be deduced therefrom. That being the position, we find no reason why the department should now refuse to accept the method and insist on departing from it. Reasons 2,3 and 4 given by the ITO are not at all relevant or sufficient to reject the method already accepted and approved by the department. The business of the assessee considering its nature can be treated as a single indivisible contract or as indicated by the Bombay High Court in CIT v kayarts (1977) 107 ITR 119 (Bom)as a joint venture. For these reasons we accept the appeal of the assessee and direct the ITO not to disallow the expenditure of Rs. 63,198. 6. Appeal allowed disallowance deleted.
-
1982 (9) TMI 143 - ITAT MADRAS-B
Revocable Trust ... ... ... ... ..... akshmi received the amount because she was a minor, it would not amount to payment to her. It is also unnecessary for us to go into the question of the validity of the trust or as to whether there is any violation thereof, though we have our doubt as to whether the trust created in the circumstances in favour of a non-existent indefinite person, depending on the uncertain event of a marriage taking place, would be a valid one. However, as we have already observed it is not necessary to go into this aspect as the actual payment of the amount to Geethalakshmi is before the marriage took place is an accomplished fact and cannot be disputed. We may observe in passing that the decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court relied on by the assessee is not quite relevant and is distinguishable and in the absence of any dispute as to whether there was adequate consideration for the transfer or not, it is not necessary for us to consider the decision. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1982 (9) TMI 140 - ITAT MADRAS-A
... ...
... ... ..... e above contentions raised by the Revenue. In the above case, the High Court has repelled similar contention raised by the Revenue before observing as under at page 175 Being a question dealing with the jurisdiction of an officer deal with a case we are unable to agree with the ld. Counsel that the amendment was retrospective in effect in the sense that it would apply even to a case where the offence or infringement was committed prior to the amendment . We find that in the instant case, the AAC had only followed the aforesaid ruling of the Madras High Court. The ruling of the Madras High Court, aforesaid, is binding on us. The ruling of the Karnataka High Court, cited by the Departmental Representative has not referred to the dictum laid down by the Supreme Court in (1979) 12 CTR (SC) 198 (1979) 120 ITR 1 (SC) referred to above. For the foregoing reasons, we uphold the order of the AAC for both the years. 5. In the result, the appeals of the Revenue fail and stand dismissed.
........
|
