|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 1 to 20 of 587 Records
-
2011 (10) TMI 781 - ITAT KOLKATA
... ...
... ... ..... been received. In such circumstances, it can be said that it is merely a fresh application of mind by the same Assessing Officer to the same set of facts. What the Assessing Officer has said about the order of the first appellate authority while recording reasons under Section 147 of the Act he could have said even in the original order of assessment because such appellate order was before him at that time. Thus, it is a case of mere change of opinion which does not provide jurisdiction to the Assessing Officer to initiate proceedings under Section 147 of the Act. In the present case before us also, the case of claim of deduction Under Section 80P of the Act falls squarely under the above discussion and we are of the view that the reasons recorded does not bring out any income escaped, hence, issuance of notice Under Section 148 r.w. Section 147 of the Act is bad and quashed. 6. In the result, Assessee's appeal is allowed. 7. Order pronounced in open court on 31.10.2011.
-
2011 (10) TMI 780 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... 08. The Suit, therefore, as filed on the court opening day i.e. 5.01.2009, in the present facts and circumstances, is within limitation. 6. Therefore, considering the uncontroverted averments made, there is no reason not to accept the case of the Plaintiffs to grant summons for judgment as prayed. There is no denial or defence to the averments and the documents of the Plaintiffs. 7. In so far as the interest part is concerned, though the interest as per the invoice is claimed at 19.5% as not paid within 7 days from the date of delivery of goods, however, the learned counsel appearing for the Plaintiffs fairly suggested to pass appropriate order about the rate of interest. Therefore, I am inclined to restrict the same at 9% per annum instead of 19.5% as mentioned in the statement of claims. That will be also the future interest till realisation. 8. Resultantly, the summons for judgment is disposed of accordingly decree be drawn accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs.
-
2011 (10) TMI 779 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... aim at the outset. 21. Further, the Special Court, having held that the subject property is not the Government land or an Evacuee property, it ought not to have held also that the respondents acquired possessory title over the property in the circumstances enumerated. Whether the respondents have obtained the possessory title by adverse possession or by any other means is unnecessary in a matter dealing with an application filed by the Government, more so, when the Government failed to establish its right, title or authority in claiming the subject property as its own. 22. In the result, W.P. Nos. 15679, 15697, 16120 and 26448 of 2005 are dismissed. However, it is to be noted that the dismissal of W.P. No. 15697 of 2005 is only in respect of the claim of the Government and it shall not have any effect on the rival claims among the private parties in the L.G.C. No. 28 of 2002, the subject matter of which is pending in W.P. No. 6171 of 2005. There shall be no order as to costs.
-
2011 (10) TMI 778 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... rt of the cylinder. He says that regulators, valves, blue die, P.P. Caps etc. are purchased and sold separately and they should be charged separately. In short he says that benefit of 'Form-C' can not accrue to the revisionist. I have considered the rival arguments. The judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the arguments of the petitioners leads matter to the conclusion that the order impugned has not taken the element of mens-rea in consideration and in view of Hon'ble Supreme Court the order is bad, it is accordingly set aside. The matter is remitted back to the First Assessing Authority for fresh consideration in accordance with law. Any observation in this order will not affect fresh assessment of the case. The authority shall be at liberty to apply his mind independently. Since the matter is send back on remand it may be heard expeditiously. Till the matter is decided again, petitioner shall not be forced to pay the amount of penalty imposed upon it.
-
2011 (10) TMI 777 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ax Act, 1961. 2. This Court had an occasion to consider the said question in a batch of cases in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. M/s. Tata ELSXI Ltd., in ITA 70/2009 and other connected matters, where it has been held that it have to be excluded from the total turnover. 3. Following the aforesaid judgment, these appeals preferred by the revenue are dismissed as no substantial question of law do arise for consideration in these appeals.
-
2011 (10) TMI 776 - ITAT KOLKATA
... ...
... ... ..... is not the position and in fact that is not even alleged. Furthermore, the Tribunal has also found that the assessee had been able to establish existence of a reasonable cause, even if the finding of the Tribunal that there was no violation is not accepted. In the circumstances, there is no reason to take a different view of the matter. The Tribunal has found that on the facts and in the light of the evidence on record there was no violation of either the provisions of section 269SS or section 269T of the Act. The Tribunal has further found that there was a reasonable cause, assuming that there was any violation by the assessee. Hence, the Tribunal has rightly deleted the penalties levied under sections 271D and 271E of the Act. In view of the above, we are of the view that penalty u/s. 271D of the Act cannot be levied in this case and accordingly, we delete the same. 4. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. 5. Order pronounced in the open court on 28.10.2011
-
2011 (10) TMI 775 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... held as follows When the power of judicial review is invoked in the matters relating to tenders or award of contracts, certain special features have to be considered. A contract is a commercial transaction and evaluating tenders and awarding contracts are essentially commercial functions. In such cases principles of equity and natural justice stay at a distance. If the decision relating to award of contracts is bona fide and is in public interest, Courts will not exercise the power of judicial review and interfere even if it is accepted for the sake of argument that there is a procedural lacuna. 22. On the touch stone of the law laid down by the Supreme Court, it is not possible for this Court to come to the conclusion that the decision making process was arbitrary or that the decision to award the contract to the Third Respondent suffers from any illegality. 23. For these reasons, we dismiss the Petition. In the circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs.
-
2011 (10) TMI 774 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ed in the present case, there is always a shifting body of occupants, consisting of persons who are willing to shift loyalties to rival builders against a promise of better incentives. Consents once given cannot be allowed to be revoked at the whim and fancy of individual occupants. If that was to be allowed, no scheme for redevelopment could be successfully implemented. Though none of the Petitioners had furnished their consents, what is material is that there is a determination of fact that 70% of the existing occupants have consented to the scheme." 4. On these facts, we are of the view that the exercise of the writ jurisdiction under Article 226 is not warranted, the effect of which would be to obstruct the work of development at the behest of four occupants. No case for interference has therefore been made out. The Petition is accordingly dismissed. In view of the dismissal of the Petition, Chamber Summons 132 of 2011 does not survive and is accordingly disposed of.
-
2011 (10) TMI 773 - ITAT BANGALORE
... ...
... ... ..... to be adjudicated afresh by considering the relevant Notification issued by the CBDT which was furnished before the ld. CIT(A). It is also relevant to point out that the AO himself in the assessment order dated 31.12.2008 has observed as under “However, subject to production of the said documentary evidence Viz board’s notification the order will be modified accordingly, if it is found necessary.” From the above observation, it appears that the copy of the said Notification was not available to the AO, that is why the same view was taken by him as was taken in the original assessment order dated 16.8.2004. 6. In view of the above discussion, the matter is restored back to the file of Assessing Officer to be adjudicated afresh in accordance with the law after providing due and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 7. In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Pronounced in the open court on this 31st day of October, 2011.
-
2011 (10) TMI 772 - ITAT PUNE
... ...
... ... ..... case, the relevant facts are that rectification proceeding were initiated to give effect to the audit objection and the same was dropped on having satisfied explanation of the assessee. On the same issue, the CIT invoked the provisions of section 263 of the Act and the same is not held valid by the Hon’ble High Court. Considering the homology the facts and proceedings involved in the instant case, we are of the opinion that the CIT erred in assuming jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Act, as the proceedings initiated by the Assessing Officer to give effect to the audit objection during the post assessment proceedings of get merged with Assessing Officer order passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act. Therefore, on this preliminary issue, we are of the opinion that the assessee should get relief on the grounds raised in the appeal. Accordingly grounds raised by the assessee are allowed. 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the court on 05 -10-2011.
-
2011 (10) TMI 771 - ITAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... be two opinion possible. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the issue of valuation/FMV accepted by the Assessing Officer while passing the assessment order u/s 143(3) cannot be disturbed and re-determined under the provisions of sec. 154, as the said issue, in our view, is not an error or mistake apparent on the face of the order, which can be rectified under the provisions of sec. 154. The Assessing Officer has travelled beyond his jurisdiction while passing the order u/s 154. Accordingly, we set aside the order passed u/s 154 as well as the order of the CIT(A) and delete the addition made by the Assessing Officer while passing the order u/s 154. 6.1 As we have set aside the order passed u/s 154 for want of jurisdiction; therefore, we do not propose to go into the validity of reference u/s 55A, which in any case subject matter of order u/s 143(3). 7 In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced on the 28th, day of Oct 2011.
-
2011 (10) TMI 770 - ITAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... 53,660, and, to that extent, the impugned addition will amount to double taxation. This argument, however, overlooks the fact that addition has been made on account of understating the value of an asset in the balance sheet, and that it only shows clearly incorrect accounts. What has been offered to tax in the profit and loss account is income but what has been brought to tax, by way of impugned addition, is understatement of the value of the asset in balance sheet, which could be attributed to a variety of factors such as sale of this WIP out of books of account. No explanation whatsoever has been offered for the discrepancy. Under these circumstances, and in view of limited argument of the assessee-which we have rejected on merits, we confirm the action of the authorities below and decline to interfere in the matter. 10. Ground No.2 is thus dismissed. 11. In the result, appeal is partly allowed in the terms indicated above. Pronounced in the open court on 14th October, 2011
-
2011 (10) TMI 769 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... on to the eligibility criteria of 2011 Haj policy requiring minimum office area of 205 sq. ft. is carved out only in respect of allocation of 800 quotas available for allotment with the Government which otherwise would have either gone waste or lapsed, without affecting the final list dated 14.9.2011 which is already forwarded to the Government of Saudi Arabia. 34. In the result, Rule in all the above petitions is partly made absolute in the above terms. No order as to costs. 35. At this stage, the Learned Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 & 5 has prayed that the direction given by this Court in paragraph 32 of the judgement in respect of allocation of 800 quotas by following the procedure stipulated in Clauses (i) and (ii) of paragraph 32 of the judgment be kept in abeyance for four weeks. It is difficult for us to grant the said request because in the absence of such direction, the quota of 800 would have either gone waste or lapsed. Hence, the request is rejected.
-
2011 (10) TMI 768 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... NFC as there is no finding that the mate's receipts were tendered or delivered with a demand for issue of bills of lading prior to 19.1.1979. The High Court has failed to consider this important aspect and wrongly assumed that breach, default, delay could be attributed to Shaw Wallace, in issuing the bills of lading, even before the mate's receipts were tendered on 19.1.1979. The decisions of the learned Single Judge and division bench of the High Court can not therefore be sustained. Conclusion 39. In view the above, the appeals are disposed of as follows (i) CA No. 7099/2001 (Re Eastern Grand) is allowed and the judgment and decree of the High Court in so far as it decrees the suit against the Appellant is set aside. The decree against the second Respondent herein (first Defendant in the suit) is not disturbed, (ii) CA No. 7100/2001 (Re Pichit Samut) is dismissed and the judgment and decree of the High Court is affirmed, (iii) Parties to bear their respective costs.
-
2011 (10) TMI 767 - ITAT CHENNAI
... ...
... ... ..... oy the facilities and services provided by the club. The entrance fee paid by the nonvoting members is nothing but a fee collected by the assessee club to confer such permissive rights for a limited period. They do not have any connection with the corpus fund and assets of the assessee club. In an emergency, the regular voting members alone will be called upon to contribute; and not the non-voting members. Therefore, needless to say that the fee/s paid by nonvoting members, by whatever name called, will be in the nature of revenue receipts. 5. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case, we hold that the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in law in holding that the entrance fees collected from non-voting members are capital in nature. His order is therefore, vacated on this point. The order of the assessing authority is restored. 6. In result, this appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed. Order pronounced on Thursday, the 13th of October, 2011 at Chennai.
-
2011 (10) TMI 766 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
... ...
... ... ..... ng regard to the entirety of the facts and circumstances of the case and clear findings of the AO as well as of the CIT(A), we do not find any infirmity in the findings of the CIT(A) and hence the same are upheld. 9. In Ground No.3, the ld. ‘AR’ contended that the additions made u/s 40(a)(ia) are unwarranted as only reimbursement of freight and cartage expenses are involved in the matter. Ld. ‘DR’ placed reliance on the order of the lower authorities. 10. We have carefully perused the factual matrix of the case, relevant findings and rival submissions. We are of the considered opinion that it is a case of reimbursement of freight and cartage expenses. Hence, the provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) are not applicable in the present case. Therefore, findings of the ld. CIT(A) are set aside and the assessee succeeds in this Ground of Appeal. 11. Resultantly, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 17th October,2011.
-
2011 (10) TMI 765 - ITAT DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... had no jurisdiction to issue notice on 28th March, 2003 to the assessee under sec. 148 for the Assessment Year 1996-97. 16. Other cases relied upon by the assessee are also on similar line. 17. In the light of the discussions made above, we therefore, hold that the assessment under sec. 144/147 made by the ITO, Ward 37(1), New Delhi was without jurisdiction and was bad in law inasmuch as no valid notice u/s 148 of the Act was ever issued by the said ITO, Ward 37(1), New Delhi before completing the assessment under sec.144/147 of the Act. 18. Since the assessment order framed by the ITO, Ward 37(1), New Delhi under sec. 144/147 of the Act has been held to be invalid and without jurisdiction, the various other grounds regarding the various additions confirmed by the learned CIT(A), have become redundant and need no adjudication at this stage. 19. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. 20. This decision is pronounced in the Open Court on 14th October, 2011.
-
2011 (10) TMI 764 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... port, the learned single Judge shall pass appropriate orders for apportionment of the sale proceeds. Indian Bank shall file a report before the single Judge as well as the Official Liquidator. • The Company Court shall pass appropriate orders for working out the legitimate dues of the workers pari passu with the secured creditors and other dues payable to the electricity Board, E.S.I. Corporation, E.P.F. Organisation and other claims. However, there is no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition in M.P. No. 1 of 2011 is closed. M.P. No. 2 of 2011 filed by the Workers Union and M.P. No. 3 of 2011 filed by the Indian Bank, Asset Recovery Management Branch, Madurai are disposed of directing the Indian Bank and the workmen to file impleading applications before the single Judge in C.P. No. 78 of 2008 to implead themselves. On such applications being filed, the learned single Judge is required to implead the Indian Bank and the workmen in the C.P.
-
2011 (10) TMI 763 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... the addresses of his stay with the trial court; (iii) The passport/s of the petitioner shall be deposited with the trial court, if not already deposited. (iv) He shall not influence any of the witnesses or temper with the evidence. (v) He shall remain present as and when called by the ld. Trial Court. 37. Needless to state if any of the above condition is breached, the investigating authority may take steps to get his bail cancelled. 38. Accordingly, the Bail Appln. No. 1414/2011 is allowed in the above terms. 39 At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the surety amount is too high and he would not be able to arrange the same. At his request, the said amount is reduced to ₹ 50 Lacs (Rupees Fifty Lakhs) with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial court. 40. Since the main bail application has been allowed, the Crl.M.B.1744/2011 becomes infructuous and is dismissed as infructuous. 41. Dasti under the signatures of Court Master.
-
2011 (10) TMI 762 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... ed Tanweer Ahmad, Adv., Mrs. Anil Katiyar, Adv. ORDER Leave granted. The appeals will be heard on the SLP paper books. Additional documents, if any, may be filed by the parties. Application for impleadment will be considered at the time of hearing of the appeals. Ad-interim order dated 17th September, 2010 is made absolute till the disposal of the appeals.
........
|
