Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Madras
Reported in : (1984)8ITD903(Mad.)
1. This appeal is directed against the disallowance of the claim for deduction of Rs. 31,385.50 under Section 32(1)(iii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act').2. The assessee is a registered firm. The assesses was carrying on business in bus body building and also had machine shops and foundries as well as a unit making bolts and nuts as ancillary unit for carrying on the main business. The business of the manufacture of bolts and nuts was being carried on in the name of Annamallais Bolts & Nuts until 1-11-1976, when it was closed down. Though the assessee was maintaining separate accounts for these activities, the profit and loss of the units were consolidated and the entire business was treated as one single unit for income-tax purposes. After the closure of the bolts and nuts unit, the written down value of the plant and machinery in that section was continued to be shown in the balance sheet as on 31-3-1977, 31-3-1978, 31-3-1979 at Rs. 1,31,138.50. The furniture and fixtures...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Madras
Reported in : (1984)8ITD64(Mad.)
1. Heavy penalties in the aggregate Rs. 88,373 for the five assessment years 1970-71 to 1974-75 (both inclusive) were levied on an assessee, who had only a petty wealth-tax liability of Rs. 7,121 in the aggregate for the said five years, for the reason that the wealth-tax returns to be voluntarily furnished were furnished late. Fortunately the AAC cancelled these uncalled for impositions. Hence, the department appeals.2. The facts are well stated in the orders of the wealth-tax authorities. Therefore, we need not, except to the extent necessary to set out our viewpoint, repeat those. The business of the assessee is money-lending. He was already an income-tax assessee but not a wealth-tax assessee. There was a search in his premises on 9-10-1973.Therefore, he availed of the benefits of voluntary disclosure provided under the Voluntary Disclosure of Income and Wealth Ordinance, 1975.Because of the search in the premises, it is Section 14 (disclosure of income in case of search and seizu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Madras
Reported in : (1985)12ITD44(Mad.)
1. This appeal by the assessee, Blue Chips & Metals, Coimbatore, a partnership firm, relates to its income-tax assessment for the year 1980-81. The firm was assessed as a registered firm for the assessment year concerned. Previously, assessments were made on it in the status of an unregistered firm and it had incurred losses from the assessment years 1973-74 to 1979-80 aggregating to Rs. 5,24,410. In the assessment made for the assessment year 1980-81 also, the firm had incurred a loss of Rs. 75.000 and such loss was allocated to its various partners. The assessee claimed in the appeal before the AAC that the losses brought forward from the earlier years should also be allocated and set off against the partners' income. The AAC found that according to the Kerala High Court decision referred to and relied on by the assessee in this connection, the loss incurred by a firm in an earlier year, when it is assessed as an unregistered firm, is eligible to be carried forward and set off u...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Madras
Reported in : (1984)7ITD845(Mad.)
1. The question to be decided in this appeal concerns the interpretation of Section 37(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') read with Rule 6D of the Income-tax Rules, 1962. Delhi Bench 'E' of the Tribunal had occasion to consider this aspect in the case of Bharat Commerce & Industries v. ITO [IT Appeal No. 53 and 538 (Delhi) of 1980 : Assessment year 1975-76] reported in [1981] 7 Taxman 194 (Delhi). By its order dated 22-5-1981 in Bharat Commerce & Industries' case (supra) the Tribunal held that the period spent by an employee in staying on duty at a place outside the headquarters was not period spent in travelling and, hence, the daily allowance paid for such period was outside the disallowance prescribed by Section 37(3)/rule 6D. After laying down this principle, the Delhi Bench sent the case back to the ITO for determining the admissibility of the expenditure claimed after taking into account the actual period spent by the employee outside his headquarters in conducti...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Madras
Reported in : (1985)14ITD295(Mad.)
1. This appeal is directed against the imposition of penalty under Section 271(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act').2. The assessee is an individual. The assessment for the assessment year 1970-71 was originally completed on 24-3-1972 on a total income of Rs. 1,241. However, the assessment was reopened under Section 147 of the Act and a notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued on 25-1-1975. The assessee filed a return on 16-2-1979 showing the same income of Rs. 1,241. The assessment was completed on 28-2-1979 on a total income of Rs. 31,480. The ITO also initiated proceedings for imposition of penalty and called upon the assessee to show cause why penalty should not be imposed for the delay in filing the return in response to the notice under Section 148. The assessee filed a reply dated 5-1-1981 in which he stated that he was under the honest impression that there was no need for him to file the return since the income returned was less than the taxable limit. But the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Madras
Reported in : (1984)9ITD400(Mad.)
1. This appeal by the revenue is directed against the order of the AAC granting deduction under Section 80T of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act').2. The assessee is an individual. In the previous year ended 31-12-1979, corresponding to the assessment year 1980-81, the assessee had shown loss of Rs. 44,208 under the head 'Profits and gains of business or profession'. The assessee also had capital gains of Rs. 29,600 from the sale of the property as well as certain shares.According to the assessee, the deduction under Section 80T should be given out of this capital gains of Rs. 29,600 before setting off the capital gains against the loss from business in computing the total income. But the ITO set off the capital gains against the business income which resulted in the gross total income being a net loss. He, therefore, decided that the assessee was not assessable for this assessment year 1980-81. But the assessee appealed and contended that if the deduction under Section 80T is given ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Madras
Reported in : (1984)7ITD431(Mad.)
1. The two questions that arise in this departmental appeal for the assessment year 1975-76 are dealt with as follows : Flats at Bombay - Whether guest house within the meaning of Section 37(4) of Income-tax Act, 1961.It is for this point that this Special Bench is constituted. The assessee, a public limited company, manufactures textiles, cotton yarns, fertilizers and also owns coffee estates. The registered office is at Madras with factories at Tamil Nadu and Adoni in Karnataka. It has also some residential flats at Bombay where its directors and employees used to stay while on business tour in that city. When the expenditure of Rs. 37,088 for the maintenance of these flats was claimed as a deduction, the ITO invoked Section 37(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') and held that it is an expenditure on the maintenance of a guest house which has only to be disallowed under that sub-section. This question in the assessee's own case had come up before the Tribunal for the assessme...
Tag this Judgment!