Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Reported in : (1992)43ITD586(Kol.)
1. this appeal filed by the department raises the question whether under section 40a(12) of the it act the limit of rs. 10,000 prescribed thereunder is in respect of the expenditure incurred for every assessment year to which the proceedings relate or the limit is only an overall limit and nothing more than rs. 10,000 can be allowed.legal charges asst. yr. rs.to khaitan consultants ltd.re: hearing before itat 1962-63 4,210re: -do- 1973-74 760re: ref. application before itat 1974-75 760re: hearing before itat 1973-74 760re: ref. appn, before itat 1974-75 760 before hc 1975-76 4,920re: withdrawal of writ 1975-76 1,860 section 256(2) 1976-77 3,949re: withdrawal of writ 1976-77 1,860 -do- 1977-78 2,657 -do- 1978-79 1,978 -do- 1979-80 1,923 -do- 1981-82 1,860 writ petn. 1982-83 28,513 out of the above expenditure of rs. 56,770, the ito allowed only rs. 10,000 and disallowed the balance. apparently the ito thought that section 40a(12) authorised the allowance of only rs. 10,000. the assessee contested the disallowance on the ground that under section 40a(12) an amount of rs. 10,000 is allowable in respect of each assessment year in respect of which the expenditure is incurred and the amount mentioned in the section is not the overall limit. the cit (appeals) noted that the words used in the section supported the assessee's stand and. therefore, directed the ito to allow the entire expenditure. he, however, directed the ito to maintain a record to ensure that expenditure above rs. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Reported in : (2000)74ITD298(Kol.)
1. this appeal by the assessee for block period 1986-87 to 27-8-1996 is directed against the block assessment order under section 158bc(c) dated 29-8-1997.2. a search under section 132 of i.t. act was conducted at the residence of the assessee at calcutta on 27-8-1996. the assessee filed return in form no. 2b showing nil undisclosed income. during the assessment proceedings the assessee was examined under section 131 of the i.t. act on 28-1-1997. a bunch of loose sheets (annexure a-2) was found during search at the residence of shyam lutheria. in that bunch of papers, marked a-2, page no. 397 written by p.r. pandia showed payment of rs. 10 lacs in the name of the assessee. pages 442 to 444 of the said bunch were in the hand-writing of the assessee who stated that the said entries appear to be made in the course of business of shaw wallace & co. the assessing officer made an addition of rs. 10 lacs as assessee's undisclosed income on the basis of said page 397 of annexure a-2. the assessing officer also made addition of rs. 4,500 on account of undisclosed investment in shares of tvs whirlpool india ltd. for assessment year 1992-93 and a sum of rs. 1,000 as undisclosed investment in shares of sarat sea foods ltd. for assessment year 1995-96. aggrieved by this said block assessment order the assessee has preferred this appeal before the tribunal.3. we have heard the arguments of both the sides and also perused the record.4. the assessee has raised as many as 6 grounds of appeal .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Reported in : (2007)109TTJ(Kol.)673
1. this is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dt. 19th july, 2006 of the cit(a)-xvii, kolkata, for asst. yr. 2003-04. in this appeal by the assessee, the following grounds have been raised: 1. that the learned cit(a) misunderstood the clarification and submission of the appellant and erred in confirming the addition of rs. 84,10,927 at amta work, rs. 46,90,650 at alipurduar work which may kindly be deleted. 2. the accounts of the assessee are audited and principles of accountancy have been followed correctly and the learned cit(a) erred in understanding the clarification. 3. in respect of addition of work-in-progress amounting to rs. 57,28,926, it is stated that the process of measuring and calculation is wrong and the learned cit(a) erred in properly appreciating the fact and confirming the addition; the same may kindly be deleted.2. the first two grounds are against sustenance of additions of rs. 84,10,927 in respect of government sub-contract works for amta-jhikara road and rs. 46,90,650 for alipurduar siltorsa bridge by the cit(a).the facts, in brief, relating to these additions are that the assessee carries on contract business under the name and style of m/s neo build corporation. vide agreement dt. 1st june, 2001 by and between the assessee and m/s mackintosh burn ltd. (in short mbl), m/s mbl awarded sub-contract government work of construction of rcc double lane road bridge along amta-jhikira road, howrah. as per the agreement, rates for the entire .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Reported in : (1992)40ITD614(Kol.)
1. these cross appeals filed by the department and the assessce are directed against the order of the cit(appeals) dated 1-11-l988 for the assessment year 1985-86. we shall take up the appeal filed by the department first for disposal. the grounds raised by the department arc against- (1) deletion of the excise duty rebate of rs. 26,13,819 from the assessment; (2) deletion of the disallowance of the expenses on running and maintenance of jeeps and cars under section 37(3a).2. the assessee is a public limited company. during the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1985-86, the assessee was running its own sugar mill and distillery at seohara in u.p. it was also manufacturing oil and confectionery in bihar and tea in assam.3. in the course of manufacture of sugar in its factory, the assessee-company was liable to pay excise duty. in order to compensate the sugar companies for the lower recovery of sugar from cane during the summer months, the government of india formulated a scheme of rebate on the excise duty payable by the sugar companies. this scheme was announced by the ministry of finance (deptt. of revenue), new delhi, on 21-4-1982 by notification no. 132 of l982-central excise.broadly speaking the notification announced a rebate of rs. 40 per quintal of free sale sugar and rs. 24.50 per quintal of levy sugar from the excise duty payable by the sugar factories. the scheme, in short, provided that the rebate shall be allowed in respect of excess production .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Reported in : (2003)79TTJ(Kol.)14
1. these three appeals relate to the same assessee and arise out of common set of facts. we, therefore, deem it expedient to dispose of all these appeals by this consolidated order, out of these three appeals which are subject-matter of this order, ita no 103/cal/2001, filed by the assessee, and ita no 237/cal/2001, filed by the revenue, are cross-appeals against the order dt. 28th nov., 2000, passed by the cit(a)-i kolkata in the matter of order under section 201(1a) r/w section 194c of the it act, 1961. ita no 238/cal/01 pertains to penalty under section 221 in the matter of same deduction issue. we will take up all the three appeals together.2. in order to properly appreciate controversy requiring our adjudication, it is necessary to take a careful look at rather peculiar facts leading to this litigation before us. itc ltd. (hereinafter referred to as itc) entered into an agreement with pak~indo-lanka committee (hereinafter referred to as pilcom), organisers of 1996 world cup cricket tournament, for sponsoring the said tournament. in consideration of being granted the sponsorship, itc was required to make payment of uk 8 million out of which 55 per cent was to be paid in british pounds and the balance 45 per cent was to be paid in indian rupees. it was under these arrangements that the itc made, besides other payments, following four payments to pilcom which are subject-matter of this litigation before us.however, before we come to the core issue regarding tax deductions .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Reported in : (2001)77ITD405(Kol.)
1. this is an appeal filed by the department against the order of the cit(a) dated 2-6-1992. the only ground of appeal raised by the department is as under : that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned commissioner of income-tax (appeals)-v, calcutta erred in deleting the addition of rs. 1,74,95,000 made by the assessing officer as per provision of section 10(3) of the income-tax act.2. the facts of the case as appearing from the orders of the authorities below are the following : 2.1 that the assessee filed the return declaring total income of rs. 7,48,630 on 31-8-1990. in the return filed, the assessee, however, declared in part iv of the return, to have received the following amounts which were claimed to be exempt from tax. (i) amount received from the estate of late shri s.b. wardekar, the assessee's father - rs. 2,09,184. (ii) amount received as compensation for non--competition to the business of w.i.e.l. paid by u.b. group companies - rs. 175 lakhs.in the course of assessment proceedings the assessee also approached the d.c.i.t., range-viii, calcutta seeking directions in terms of section 144a of the i.t. act. in response to that, the said dcit vide his order dated 26-3-1992 gave the directions, in accordance with the said directions the acit completed the assessment of the assessee on a total income of rs. 1,82,62,014 after including therein the said sum of rs. 175 lakhs as the assessee's income under section 10(3) of the i.t.act. the brief .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Reported in : (1993)45ITD81(Kol.)
1. the assessee has filed this appeal assailing the order of the appellate commissioner dated 6-8-1988 relating to assessment year 1985-86.2. the assessee has taken 8 grounds and ground nos. 1 & 2 are not pressed.3. in the third ground the assessee has a grievance that the appellate commissioner was not justified in agreeing with the assessing officer in taxing the sum of rs. 25,27,154 being subsidy received from the govt. of india. the assessee's counsel has filed a paper book containing 28 pages and submitted that the amount received as subsidy from the govt. of india under the transport subsidy scheme of 1971 is not a revenue receipt and, therefore, not taxable. the grant of subsidy is given to the assessee for the growth of industries in various regions as mentioned in the subsidy scheme of 1971 and he took us to the various clauses of the copy of the transport subsidy scheme which is in the paper book from pages 1 to 5. the receipt of subsidy by the assessee, contended counsel for the assessee sri salarpuria, is a grant and gift for the growth and development of industries and cannot be assessed to tax. the assessee's counsel has relied upon the decisions of various courts citations of which are given as under :- 2. cit v. national industrial corporation [1989] 178 itr 180 (punj. & har.) it was, therefore, urged by sri salarpuria. assessee's counsel that the addition of rs. 25,27,154 should have been deleted by the appellate commissioner. the departmental representative .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Reported in : (1994)50ITD125Cal
1. these two appeals filed by the revenue pertain to the assessment years 1982-83 and 1986-87.2. the first ground in the appeal for the assessment year 1982-83 which is also the only ground in the assessment year 1986-87 is that the cit(a) was in error in directing the ito to assess the licence fees received by the assessee under the head 'business'. the dispute arises this way. the assessee is a partnership firm which was deriving income under the leave and licence arrangement entered into with shri kashi nath kanodia representing m/s. goverdhandas bishwanath, a firm. the assessee firm was carrying on the business of trading and speculation in various commodities, commission agencies, flour and atta, etc. it also owned a flour mill known as dhanbad flour mills. the flour mill was being worked by the assessee itself prior to 1-8-1975. on 21-4-1976 a document described as indenture of leave and licence was entered into under which the assessee granted leave and licence to kashi nath kanodia who represented the partnership of m/s. goverdhandas bishwanath to work dhanbad flour mills. under the agreement, the assessee granted leave and licence of the factory premises, machinery, plant and other equipments and accessories to the licensee on certain terms and conditions appearing in the agreement. under clause (1) of the agreement, the leave and licence covered all the rights and benefits of quotas, licences, grants, privileges, agreements, contracts, orders, permits, etc., .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Reported in : (2002)83ITD87(Kol.)
1. the hon'ble president has constituted this special bench for deciding the following points : "1. whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on a proper interpretation of sections 2(47)(iv) and 45(2) of the act, the assessee was rightly assessed to capital gains tax. on a sum of rs. 3,92,850 2. whether, the assessee is liable to the capital gains tax on the above sum notwithstanding that the conversion of the capital asset into stock-in-trade took place prior to 1st april, 1985, the date from which both the sections came into force?" 2. the facts involved in the present case are as follows. the assessee-company was holding a plot of leasehold land at 14 & 15, old court house street, kolkata. the land was held as investment. the middle portion of the land measuring 914 sq. mt. was transferred from the investment account and converted into assessee's stock-in-trade during the accounting year ended on 31st march, 1983. on conversion the market value of the land was estimated by a chartered valuer. as per his report, the value of the converted land as on 1st april, 1982, was rs. 27.29 lakh. a multi-storeyed building was constructed on the said land by the assessee. a portion of the building was transferred to united bank of india by registered deed of conveyance during the accounting year ended on 31st march, 1989, relevant to the asst. yr.1989-90.3. in the return of income the assessee had admitted the profit on the sale of building under the head " .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Reported in : (1999)69ITD14(Kol.)
1. this appeal is instituted by the department against the order of the cit(a) for the asst. yr. 1989-90 on the following effective grounds : "1. on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned cit(a) erred in law and on facts in cancelling the order passed under s. 154 of the it act, 1961, modifying an earlier order under s. 143(l)(a) ibid wherein deduction under s. 80g was allowed overlooking the jurisdictional high court's specific decision on this count; 2. on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned cit(a) erred in law and on facts in holding that the rectification made under s. 154 was neither called for nor in conformity with law when notice under s. 143(2) had been issued." 2. in this case, the return of income was filed on 27th december, 1989, and was processed under s. 143(1)(a) of the it act, 1961, on 23rd april, 1990. the ao found that the assessee had claimed deduction under s. 80g of the said act on donation of rs. 17 lakhs paid to viswamongal trust. the deduction was allowed while processing the return under s.143(l)(a). however, the ao found that the hon'ble calcutta high court has held that donations to viswamongal trust were not eligible for deduction under s. 80g against which the assessee is in appeal before the hon'ble supreme court. the above fact were mentioned by the assessee in the letter dt. 26th december, 1989, which accompanied the return. the ao followed the cbdt instruction no. 1814 f. no. 244/2/89 ita-2, dt. .....
Tag this Judgment!