Kolkata Court October 1992 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Sencorp India Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-30-1992
Reported in: (1993)44ITD652(Kol.)
1. The only point of dispute in this appeal is whether the CIT (Appeals) was justified in sustaining an addition of Rs. 17,87,500 as the income of the appellant-company from undisclosed sources.2. This appeal arises out of the Income-tax assessment of M/s. Sencorp India Ltd., the appellant herein. The assessment year involved is 1987-88 for which the previous year ended on 30-6-1986. While completing the assessment of the appellant-company for this year on 2-3-1990 under Section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Assessing Officer added back a sum of Rs. 53,62,500 as the income of the appellant from undisclosed sources. According to him, the appellant-company introduced this amount as advances and loans, that the departmental enquiries revealed that investment companies in certain cases were utilised as a device to introduce the concealed income and that none of the share applicants to whom summonses were issued by him were produced by the assessee nor their sources for investmen...
Ahmed Hassan and Co. Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-29-1992
Reported in: (1993)44ITD669(Kol.)
1. This is an appeal against the order of the DC (Appeals) sustaining a penalty of Rs. 20,373 under Section 271B of the Income-tax Act, 1961.2. The appellant is a partnership firm carrying on business in lungies.Its head office is at Calcutta which is the selling centre, whereas it has a branch at Madras which is essentially a purchasing centre. The assessee also manufactures lungies to some extent but most of its transactions are in direct purchases and sales. The assessment year involved is 1988-89 for which the previous year ended on 31-3-1988. For this year the appellant-firm filed its return of income on 28-7-1988 declaring a taxable income of Rs. 82,910. After examining the books of account which were produced in support of its return, the 1TO completed the assessment under Section 143(3) of the IT Act on 24-5-1989 determining the appellant's total income at Rs. 89,830. Along with this order, on the same date the ITO also passed an order under Section 27 1B of the Act imposing a...
Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-26-1992
Reported in: (1993)45ITD22(Kol.)
1. This appeal raises the question whether the profit arising from sale of a capital asset could be added to the book profits shown by the assessee for the purpose of imposing tax under Section 115J of the Income-tax Act, 1961.2. Preliminary objection. --This appeal was posted for hearing before a Special Bench constituted by the President of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under Section 255(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. When the Bench assembled on September 8, 1992, to take up the matter, the Revenue presented a petition dated September 8, 1992, signed by Shri S.Halder, Appellate Assistant Commissioner, Central Circle-XII, Calcutta, stating that there was no difference of opinion on the point raised in this case, that the decisions so far rendered by the Benches of the Tribunal in the cases of V.V. Trans-Investments (P) Ltd. v. ITO [1992] 42 ITD 242 (Hyd), Asst. CIT v. Lallacherra Tea Co. (P) Ltd. [1992] 42 ITD 446 (Gauhati) and Buttwelded Tools (P) Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [1991] 39 IT...
Assistant Commissioner of Vs. Subarna Plantation and Trading
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-23-1992
Reported in: (1993)44ITD268(Kol.)
Order of assessing officer refusing to carry forward loss on the ground that return was filed beyond the prescribed time is appealable under section 246.The order of the Income Tax Officer to the effect that the loss cannot be carried forward since the return was filed beyond the time can be appealed against on the footing that the effect of such an order is a non-computation of the loss or computation of the loss at `nil' and on that basis it would come within the purview of clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 246. A right of appeal to the assessee against the decision of the Income Tax Officer refusing to carry forward the loss and the appeal to the CIT(Apppeals) was competent under section 246(1)(c).Not to current assessment years as there is no provision for filing return beyond the prescribed time.1. This appeal has been filed by the revenue. The following grounds have been raised: 1. That, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Commissioner of Income...
Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Subarna Plantation and Tradin ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-23-1992
Reported in: (1993)47TTJ(Cal)204
ORDERR. V. EASWAR, J. M. :This appeal has been filed by the Revenue. The following grounds have been raised :'1. That, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) had erred in admitting the appeal when the appellant could not be said to be aggrieved in terms of cl. (c) of sub-s. (1) of S. 246.2. That, without prejudice to ground No. 1 the learned CIT(A) erred in directing the ITO to carry forward the loss determined for the asst. yr. 1984-85.'2. The accounting year of the assessee ended on 30th June, 1983. The due date for filing the return was 30th June, 1984. However, the return of income was furnished only on 23rd Dec., 1985. In the meantime, there had been a search under S. 132 of the IT Act on 23rd Sept., 1985 and certain books of accounts and documents had been seized. The assessee had requested for extension of time to file the return. Notice under S. 139(2) had also been issued according to which the assessee should have filed the return on or before 2...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›