|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 81 to 100 of 144 Records
-
1983 (6) TMI 64 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... red by s. 30 read with Explanation to Hindu Succession Act. 9. I have carefully considered the rival submissions. The authorities cited from both the sides have also been perused. A perusal of the Will shows that it was the ancestral property which the testator was dealing with. The properties being ancestral, they came to Shri Rattan Lal Aggarwal as properties of the joint family of which he was the coparcener. Even considering the provisions of the Hindu Succession Act, there is a divergence of opinion as is evident from the judgment of the Gujarat High Court in the case of Dr. Babubhai Mansukhbhai referred to supra and the case of CIT vs. Ram Rakshpal Ashok Kumar (1968) 67 ITR 164 decided by the Allahabad High Court. Even on merits, the revenue appears to have accepted the claim of the assessee in the asst yr. 1979-80 both for income-tax as will as wealth tax purpose. I, therefore, confirm the order of the AAC which conforms to the facts of the case. 10. Appeal dismissed.
-
1983 (6) TMI 63 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... . which was not so in the instance case, as the situation in the present case arose out of partial partition by the HUF in respect of shares held by it in the firm. 10. Before we part, we May observe that the revenue should be consistent in its finding. Once a particular treatment has been meted out regarding exemption in the assessee s own case for earlier and subsequent years and also the same treatment is meted out in the case of her husband Sh. Sohan Lal, the revenue should not have departed from that course in the assessee s case for the year under consideration. 11. Since we have restored back the revenue s appeal and the assessee s cross objection to the file of the WTO and as we have rejected one ground in each of the two matters, i.e., revenue s appeal and the assessee s C.O.- in the revenue s C.O. ground No. 2 and in the assessee s C.O. ground No. 3, both revenue s appeal and the assessee s cross objection shall be treated as party allowed for statistical purposes.
-
1983 (6) TMI 62 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... 1978. Besides, there are large number of other decisions of other High Courts which support the contention of the assessee which are dealt with by the AAC in his order and repeating the same here shall only be encumbering this order. 8. Coming to the cross-objection of the assessee, firstly it has become infructuous the moment we have confirmed the order of the AAC and rejected the contention raised by the revenue in its appeal secondly, even if it is to be considered academically, the issue is covered against the assessee as per Punjab Haryana High Court decision as per which it is no more good law that if a partner has been subjected to tax, the firm in which he was a partner cannot be subjected to tax as unregistered firm but this is all academic as we have said. 9. In the light of above discussion and for the reasons given by the AAC in his order, his action is confirmed and in the result both the appeals of the revenue and cross-objection of the assessee are dismissed.
-
1983 (6) TMI 61 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... preme Court to follow a certain course in disposal of these appeals. When we thus follow the directions of the Hon ble Supreme Court, there cannot arise any question of law with which the parties may feel aggrieved because the aggrieved party, if any, is also party to the proceedings before the Supreme Court in which directions in relation to the issues before us have been issued. 9. The Tribunal works with the avowed purpose of providing easily accessible and expeditious justice to the litigants in tax matters. In order to achieve this objective, administrative and equitable considerations are not lost sight of. Therefore, on the entirety of the facts and circumstances of the case, we are satisfied that there is no case made out by the revenue to keep these appeals blocked any further. 10. The appeals in question are, therefore, directed to be fixed for regular hearing on 11th July, 1983 as announced in the open court. 11. M.P. No. 8 is allowed and M.P. No. 15 is dismissed.
-
1983 (6) TMI 60 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
Association Of Persons, Body Of Individuals ... ... ... ... ..... venth Schedule to the Constitution, but in interpreting a legislative entry, a liberal view is always taken. Such would not be the case when interpreting the expression under the Act, as the Act itself draws a distinction between individuals and HUFS. If at all, it will have to be considered whether the families can be regarded as AOPs but not a body of individuals. As mentioned above, to qualify an AOP, a stricter and more rigorous test has to be fulfilled. The families do not constitute an AOP in any view of the matter. The Mandir Parbandhkarni Committee, Jawalamukhi Temple, therefore, could not be subjected to tax and its income was rightly taken at nil by the AAC. In the light of above discussion and for the reasons given by the AAC in her order, her action is confirmed. 13. Before we part with the matter, we would like to say a word of appreciation for the AAC who came out with a really good judgment in all respects. 14. The revenue s appeal, in the result, is dismissed.
-
1983 (6) TMI 59 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
Statutory Corporation ... ... ... ... ..... a company which was established as per decision of the Haryana Government and is fully financed by the Government, for the benefit of Scheduled Castes, as mentioned in notes prefixed to the interpretation of section 10(26B) on the statute. On the basis of these facts and for the reasons given by the Commissioner (Appeals) in his order, his action is confirmed. 6. It may be only academic to adjudicate whether the assessee falls even under the first limb of section 10(26B) but, even as per that limb, income of a corporation established by a Central, State or Provincial Act is to be entitled to exemption. The assessee undoubtedly has not been established by an Act but it is as per decision taken by the Government initiated and incorporated by the Government and wholly financed by the Government and the intention of the Act can clearly be cleared that the bodies as of the assessee s type were to be exempt under section 10(26B). 7. In the result, the revenue s appeal is dismissed.
-
1983 (6) TMI 58 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
Appellate Assistant Commissioner, Reference To Valuation Officer ... ... ... ... ..... ntion by the revenue. The revenue argued before us that in the absence of reasons recorded by the WTO why discretion for making a reference to Valuation Officer was not exercised, it raises a presumption of non-utilisation of the discretion vested in him and, therefore, he failed to perform a procedural act which he could be directed to perform by the AAC. This contention of the revenue is fallacious and quixotic. The WTO has to perform various acts under the statute and in doing so in the normal course of his duties for every discretion that be uses, he cannot record his reasons in writing for doing so when there is no specific requirement of law for it. If his actions were to be adjudged by the standard which the revenue is requiring us to do because of this contention, it will be very difficult for the WTO to perform duties and this may lead to practical difficulties in the working of the Act. We, therefore, reject this contention outright as untenable. 13. Appeal allowed.
-
1983 (6) TMI 57 - ITAT CALCUTTA-E
... ...
... ... ..... 268 (1983) 140 ITR 693 (Cal) but in that case the order levying the penalty was upheld because the finding of the Tribunal was that the explanation of the assessee regarding the source of a sum of Rs. 1,24,881 had been found to be false. The remaining question of levy of penalty on the amount of Rs. 1,45,000 which was alleged to be assessee s undisclosed earnings during the earlier years was remitted back with some direction. In the present case, the ITO has not discussed anything about the circumstances which resulted in the assessees omission to show the capital gains in question and the fact that the assessee himself appeared and did not engage even a lawyer and pleaded that he did not know that the capital gains formed a part of the total income goes to prove, rather than to disprove the bona fide belief of the assessee. Keeping all the facts and circumstances of the case in view, we are of the opinion that there is no force in this appeal which is accordingly dismissed.
-
1983 (6) TMI 56 - ITAT CALCUTTA-E
... ...
... ... ..... o come to a conclusion whether in these circumstances the books maintained by the assessee could be relied upon for the purpose of computing the assessee income or they were straightway liable to be rejected. He should have at least waited for the decision of the appeal in the quantum matter or heard both of them together. In any case something should have been pointed as to why there had been such a disparity between the assessed and the returned income. The mere fact that the assessment was on estimate was not conclusive to hold that no penalty could be levied at all. Since the explanation furnished by the assessee was not furnished before the ITO, the ITO should have been given an opportunity to meet the explanation before the penalty could be deleted by the AAC. Accordingly we restore the matter back to the file of the AAC for a fresh decision in the light of our aforesaid observations. 9. For statistical purpose, this appeal shall be deemed to have been allowed as such.
-
1983 (6) TMI 55 - ITAT CALCUTTA-E
... ...
... ... ..... ntative s objection that the Special Bench Tribunal decision is contrary to the two Calcutta High Court decisions reported on (1977 109 ITR 735 (Cal) and 111 ITR 231, it is relevant to point out that in para 24 of the Tribunal s order the aforesaid two decisions have been considered and it has been observed that the Commissioner has jurisdiction u/s. 263 to revise the order of the ITO pertaining to interest refundable u/s. 214 as granting or non-granting of interest under that section is not appealable and, therefore, that part of the order cannot be said to have merged in the order of the AAC. We accordingly hold that the IAC s order having been merged with the appellate order of the CIT(A) the Commissioner had no jurisdiction in terms of s. 263 of the Act to revise the order of the IAC. In the this view of the matter, we do not consider it necessary to adjudicate on the other grounds taken in regard to the merits of the CIT s order. 5. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1983 (6) TMI 54 - ITAT BOMBAY-E
Orders Prejudicial To Interests, Reference To Valuation Officer ... ... ... ... ..... s insofar as they are prejudicial to the interests of revenue, are wide and entitle him to pass such order thereon as the circumstances of the case justify, including an order enhancing or modifying the assessment or cancelling it and directing a fresh assessment . 7. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and the legal position explained above, we uphold the orders under section 25(2) passed by the Commissioner for the assessment years 1970-71 to 1974-75, in the case of the assessee and dismiss the appeals. Before parting with this case, we may mention the last submission of Shri Dastur that, if at all, the assessment orders of the WTO were prejudicial to the assessee and not to the revenue. This argument is also untenable because the assessee, who maintains that the valuation submitted by him was a correct valuation, cannot plead that there was prejudice to him if the assessment is made on the basis of such valuation. 8. In the result, the appeals are dismissed.
-
1983 (6) TMI 53 - ITAT BOMBAY-E
Assessment Year, Capital Gains, Previous Year ... ... ... ... ..... was his right to income so long as he lives. What he has sold is the right to the income transferred to the HUF so long as the assessee lives after the transfer--which is a much shorter period. Even actuarial valuations on these two dates could be found, but the life expectation at 1970 is certainly different from the life expectation at 1976 and it would be both factually and legally incorrect to say that the assessee sold the particular asset which he acquired. Whatever he has sold is certainly not what he acquired in 1971. Both the tasks of identifying the asset and its cost of acquisition for the computation of capital gains or loss are impossible tasks that have not been performed here. Since the assessee has come up on appeal against the inclusion of the capital gains, all we can do is to delete the addition of Rs. 24,500. For the reasons mentioned in detail above, there is no question of the assessee being entitled to any capital loss. 8. The appeal is partly allowed.
-
1983 (6) TMI 52 - ITAT BOMBAY-C
... ...
... ... ..... December, 1940. Mr. Joshi says that within the meaning of s. 28, even a registered firm could commit default by not complying with the requisition u/s 22, sub-s. (4) but the default has no significance because no consequence was attached to the commission of that default by a registered firm. It is only when a default carried a certain consequence with it, namely, the possibility of a penalty being imposed for the commission of that default that the default can be considered to be an offence. 8. Now we find merit in Shri Patil s submission that assuming there is a concealment by the association, since the association did not incur any liability u/s 139 (1) of the Act to file a return any return so filed carried no consequences even of tax and as such a return could never carry an additional penal consequence of visiting such an assessee with a penalty. We find that Shri Patil is correct in his submission. As such we accept the same. Accordingly the two appeals are dismissed.
-
1983 (6) TMI 51 - ITAT BOMBAY-C
Late Filing, Penalty Proceedings ... ... ... ... ..... ame of the so-called previous authorised representatives. So, the whole theory of the assessee that his previous representative was to file the return is improbable and not reliable at all. There is also no material to show that the so-called previous authorised representative under bona fide mistake, failed to file the return. 12. Looking to the aforesaid facts, evidence on record and the preponderance of probabilities, we are satisfied that the explanation given by the assessee was false. The assessee in the present case acted deliberately in defiance of law and was guilty of conduct contumacious or dishonest or acted in conscious disregard of his obligation. Thus, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) was quite correct in sustaining the order of penalty passed by the ITO under section 271(1)(a). 13. For the reasons discussed above, the order appealed against will have to be sustained. Accordingly, it is sustained. 14. In the result, the appeal fails and the same is dismissed.
-
1983 (6) TMI 50 - ITAT BOMBAY-A
... ...
... ... ..... of its interest bearing loans for non-business purposes. Hence the department cannot disallow any claim of the interest in the determination of its profits. 4. We have carefully considered the facts and circumstances of the case. We find that at no stage of the proceedings the revenue authorities have been able to establish that any moneys borrowed by the assessee on interest had been diverted for non-business purposes. The moneys advanced to M/s Khemee Dyeing and Bleaching Works have naturally come out of the cash balance of the assessee firm. Apart form that, the credit balance of the assessee s partners with the firm has always been well over to the total advances made to the other party. In the circumstances, we are unable to hold that the assessee had diverted any of its interest bearing loans towards non-business purposes. In the circumstances the order of the CIT(A) called for no interference. The appeal filed by the revenue deserve to be and is accordingly dismissed.
-
1983 (6) TMI 49 - ITAT BOMBAY-A
... ...
... ... ..... which did not form part of the assessment order and which could have formed part of a separate order. The ratio of the decision of the Karnataka High Court and that of the Tribunal fully apply to the facts of the present case. It could not be said that the failure to pass an order u/s 217 while completing the assessment was an error apparent on the face of the record. The order levying interest is not, therefore, sustainable for this reason also. It was also suggested by the ld. departmental representative that the order u/s 154 may be treated as an order u/s 217, more so because in the light of the ruling of the Karnataka High Court, a separate order u/s 217 could be passed at any time. As the order is expressly passed as one u/s 154, we do not find our way to treat the same as an order u/s 217. 8. In view of the finding above, we do not go into the question whether the circumstances of the case justify the imposition of the penalty. 9. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1983 (6) TMI 48 - ITAT AMRITSAR
... ...
... ... ..... erest of the assessee in the firm s business but only as a servant of the assessee, the amount paid to the munim was not an allowance admissible in determining the taxable income. In any event, observed the learned Chief Justice, the profits which have come to the assessee from the partnership have come as net profits, and after they have so come, there cannot be any further deduction on account of expenditure incurred not by the partnership but by the partner who received the share or incurred on any account whatsoever. It is evident that Supreme Court did not accept the High Court s view that salary of munim, employed by the assessee could not be deducted as an outgoing to earn the share of profit. In view of the above, we hold that the assessee was fully entitled to the deduction of Rs. 4,200 incurred by him on the maintenance and running of the car which had enabled him to earn share of profit from the partnership firm in which he was a partner. 4. The appeal is allowed.
-
1983 (6) TMI 47 - ITAT AMRITSAR
... ...
... ... ..... nflict with that material. Their minds have been expressed in written agreement, but a perusal of the two accounts cannot but lead to a finding that there was a unanimity between the two parties not to charge interest on their respective credit balances due from each other. Therefore, whatever we may look at, whether from the standpoint of the consideration flowing from each other or from a consideration of the agreement or understanding reached between the two parties, we cannot hold that the funds of the assessee-trust had been advanced to M/s Amarsons without there being any adequate consideration. In this view of our finding, we cannot but vacate the finding of the lower authorities and allow the appeal of the assessee. In our consideration, it cannot be held on facts that the claim of the assessee for exemption under s. 11 on its income was assailed by the provision contained in s. 13(1)(c) r/w s. 13(1)(bb) of the IT Act. 6. The appeal, filed by the assessee, is allowed.
-
1983 (6) TMI 46 - ITAT ALLAHABAD-B
... ...
... ... ..... on before us. The assessee, therefore, does not get any relief thereon. Shri A.N. Mehrotra also pointed out before us that in para 11 of his order, the CIT (A) had observed that no depreciation had been claimed by the assessee on the generating set and that, therefore, the assessee should satisfy the ITO that this amount had been actually utilised by him in the purchase of generator in subsequent years and that if he is unable to do so within one month, the ITO s order taxing this amount as income would remain confirmed. Shri Mehrotra pointed out to the assessment order that at item No. 11, 10 depreciation amounting to Rs. 2282 had been allowed by the ITO on the generator set and, therefore, the observations made by the ld. CIT (A) on this point deserved to be deleted. We agree that in view of the factual position pointed out on behalf of the assessee, these observation should be deleted. We hold accordingly. 12. In the result, the appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed.
-
1983 (6) TMI 45 - ITAT ALLAHABAD-A
... ...
... ... ..... t, 1961/s. 19A of the WT Act, 1957. There is another aspect also which requires to be noticed. The assessment which were held by the ld. CIT to be erroneous were the assessment completed in respect of Late Shri B. N. Talwar, whereas the reason for holding the assessment to be erroneous was that the income/wealth left by the deceased should have been clubbed with the other income-wealth of Smt. Ram Dulari Talwar. In other words, according to the ld. CIT the individual assessments of Smt. Ram Dulari Talwar, were erroneous. However, no proceeding u/s 263 of the IT Act, 1961/s. 25 of the WT Act, 1957 are before us with reference to the individual assessments of Smt. Ram Dulari Talwar. In this view of the matter the impugned orders of the ld. CIT are themselves erroneous and cannot stand on the scrutiny of s. 168 and 263 of the IT Act, 1961 or s. 19A and 25 of the WT Act, 1957. Both the orders are, therefore, set aside. 6. In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed.
|
