Mumbai Court May 2006 Judgments

Mrs. Meena Rajagopal Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2006)103TTJ(Mum.)54

1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the CIT(A) dt. 6th Dec, 2005 for the asst. yr. 2000-01.2. The assessee has taken as many as 5 grounds but the only issue which emerges for our consideration is whether the amount of Rs. 1 crore by way of two gifts of Rs. 50 lakhs each received by the assessee from Shri G.K. Ramamurthy is assessee's income for the asst. yr. 2000-01 3. The facts relating to this case are in a narrow compass. The assessee filed her return of income declaring total income at Rs. 1,08,169. As noted by the AO, the assessee was working as a secretary to one Shri G.K. Ramamurthy and major source of income of the assessee was from salary. Proceedings under Section 147 of the IT Act were initiated against the assessee. During the course of assessment proceedings, it was noticed by the AO that in the bank account of the assessee with ABN Amro Bank, Chennai, there were two deposits of Rs. 50 lakhs each on 28th April, 1999 and 14th May, 1999, respecti...

ito Vs. Bdh Industries Ltd.

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. This is an appeal by revenue for the year 2001-02 against the order of Commissioner (Appeals)-IX, Mumbai dated 22-1-2004 raising the following effective grounds: (1) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Commissioner (Appeals) erred in directing the assessing officer to exclude excise duty of Rs. 60,79,328 and sales tax of Rs. 21,44,732 from the total turnover in computing the deductions under Section 80HHC. (2) The learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in holding that assessing officer has erred in reducing the gross job work receipts of Rs. 20,32,000 from the profits of the business for the purpose of calculating the deduction under Section 80HHC instead of net job work receipts of Rs. 1,01,600 wrongly relying on the decision of Hon'bleBombay High Court in the case of Bangalore Clothing Co. Ltd. 260ITR 371. (3) The learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in holding that 90 per cent scrap sales of Rs. 2,71,224 is not deductible from profit available for ded...

Hardware Trading Corporation Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2006)(105)ECC197

1. This application is made seeking invocation of powers under Rule 41 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules.2. Vide order dated 1.12.2005, the Tribunal allowed an appeal of the importers, directing the clearance of the goods without fine and penalty. The appellants thereafter have approached the Commissioner of Customs and other senior officers in the Custom House, seeking the clearance of the goods as per the directions of the Tribunal. These letters are dated 25.2.2006, 28.2.2006, 17.3.2006, 23.3.2006 and 20.4.2006 all addressed to the Commissioner of Customs (Gen), Mulund CFS, where the goods were to be cleared, as Bill of Entry had been filed at the CFS. There is no response from the Commissioner or the other officers who were endorsed these letters, as also, repeated requests made in person by the importers and their representatives elicited no response.3. If the Tribunal's orders are not to be implemented and are to be flouted with impunity, there is no purpose in having the Tribunal...

Five Star Shipping Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2006)(111)ECC748

2. The appellant is a purchaser of an imported car, released through Customs after due assessment orders, on the declared value. The importer on verification of submitted duty paid customs clearance documents purchased the car. The Customs department took possession of the car, from him seized it and initiated enquires. The valuation of the car was ordered to be increased and consequent redemption fine of Rs. 8 lakhs arrived at, on this additional valuation now arrived at; the department has ordered additional duty on the original importer and not the present appellant. However, the appellant being a purchaser of the car, in the market, under a bonafide belief that it is Customs duty paid car, is now required to pay the redemption fine. Hence this appeal.3.(a) The learned DR relies on the decision in the case of UOI v. Jain shudh Vanaspati Ltd. and VXL India Ltd. v. cc, Mumbai , to submit that once clearance has been effected under the provisions of Section 47 and if the department fi...

Rajkumar Dad and Alumayer India Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

2. The issue involved herein is determination of the activity indulged in by the applicants, viz. obtaining duty paid sections from the aluminium manufacturers of such sections and thereafter cutting them to size, drilling holes etc. to make window frames, door frames etc. would amount to manufacture under the provisions of the Central Excise Act, 1944 or not and if it amounts to manufacture whether duty is to be determined on the entire value of the window, i.e. with the frame level cost of plast and other materials also brought in and used or it should be only job charges and cost of aluminium sections. Penalty liability and demands are raised.3. After considering the material and finding that the larger bench in the case of Mahindra & Mahindra 2005 (71) RLT 513 has been relied upon by the learned Commissioner to come to his conclusions that the activity would amount to manufacturer in spite of the fact that that was a case of steel structures, indicating the similar activity at...

Nagurao Malku Gadge Vs. Income Tax Officer

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. The assessee is in appeal before us against the order of learned Commissioner (Appeals) dated 6-10-2005 passed for assessment year 2002-03. The grounds of appeal taken by the assessee are not in consonance with rule 8 of ITAT Rules. They are descriptive in nature.In brief the grievance of assessee as projected in ground No. I relates to confirmation of an addition of Rs. 80,57,680 being unexplained cash found in the possession of the assessee. In the second ground the assessee has pleaded that sufficient and adequate opportunity was not granted to the assessee. Therefore, the impugned orders are deserves to be quashed, alternatively, they deserve to be set aside. In the last ground assessee is disputing levy of interest under sections 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act.2. We have heard Shri S.M. Lala, learned Counsel for the assessee and Shri R.N. Parbat, learned Departmental Representative for the revenue.3. The brief facts of the case are that assessee is a Class-IV employee in the B...

Chandrakant Kantilal Shah Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. This appeal is filed by the assessee and is arising out of the order of Commissioner (Appeals)-V, Mumbai dated 30-10-1996. 1. That whether on facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) was justified by confirming the business loss of Rs. 7,60,765 arising out of speculative transactions by holding that the transactions were not in the ordinary course of his business and that there was nothing in law to deny the benefit of Clause (c) of proviso to Section 43(5). 2. That whether on facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) was justified by treating the business loss of Rs. 1,93,114 arising from the business of shares being as speculative loss by holding that the deliveries were not affected without disputing the genuineness of the transactions in number of scripts for purchase & sales. 3. That whether on facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) was justified by treating the business loss of R...

G.T.C. Industries Ltd. Vs. the Dy. Cit, Spl. Rg. 50

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. There being a difference of opinion between the Members constituting the Division Bench, the Hon'ble President has referred, under Section 255(4) of the I.T. Act, 1961, the following point of difference to me as a Third Member to resolve the controversy: Whether, under the facts and circumstances of the case, the provisions for bad and doubtful debts of Rs. 10,99,552/- claimed by the assessee and allowed Under Section. 143(3) proceedings by the Assessing Officer, can be disallowed by invoking the provisions contained Under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and basing on the amendment made to Section 36(1), Clause -(7), which was amended by Finance Act, 2001? 2. The assessee is a limited company and for the A.Y. 1993-94 it had debited its profit and loss account with a sum of Rs. 10,99,552 on account of provisions for doubtful debts, loans and advances In the assessment order passed on 29^thMarch 1996, Under Section 143(3) of the Act, the Assessing Officer has allowed this am...

Estate of Late N.J. Patel Vs. Dy. Cit

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. This appeal arises from the order dated 5-3-2004 of Commissioner (Appeals)-XII, Mumbai. As many as 15 grounds of appeal have been raised by the assessee, which are repetitive, narrative and argumentative.After going through the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee and after hearing Shri S.E. Dastur, the learned Counsel appearing for the assessee, we find that the grounds of appeal raise only following three issues for our adjudication: (i) Whether the income arising to the assessee from sale of plots of land is in the nature of business income or capital gains or partly as business income and partly as capital gains. The related quesuon is 'what is the fair market value of the land as on 1-4-1981 for the purpose of computation of long-term capital gains'. (ii) At what point of time, the agricultural land owned by the assessee was converted into stock-in-trade. (iii) Whether deduction is available to the assessee on account of various expenses incurred, while computing income un...

Gtc Industries Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2007)104ITD86(Mum.)

1. The above appeal has been filed by the assessee having been aggrieved by the Order of the CIT(A) dated 16-6-1998 for assessment year 1993-94 relating to the assessee.2. The sole issue raised by the assessee in this appeal pertains to the addition of a sum of Rs. 10,99,552 being provision for bad and doubtful debts claimed by the assessee and allowed under Section 143(3) proceedings by the Assessing Officer, by invoking the powers under Section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.3. On careful consideration of the material available with the Tribunal and analysing the same in the light of the arguments advanced on behalf of both the parties, we find that the original assessment for the assessment year 1993-94 was completed by the Assessing Officer under Section 143(3) by order dated 29-3-1996. Later on, Assessing Officer issued notice to rectify the said order to disallow a sum of Rs. 10,99,552 on account of provision for bad and doubtful debts and loans and advances which was claimed b...