Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Reported in : (2002)255ITR69(Kol.)
1. this appeal, filed by the revenue, is directed against the order dated february 25,1997, passed by the commissioner of income-tax (appeals)-ii, calcutta, in the matter of order under section 143(3) of the income-tax act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the act"), for the assessment year 1994-95. the revenue is aggrieved of the commissioner of income-tax (appeals) order for deleting the addition of rs. 4 lakhs in the hands of the assessee, even though the said addition was made on the basis of the assessee's own statement, both the grounds of appeal relate to this grievance.2. briefly stated, material facts of the case are that the assessee's statement was recorded during the course of survey under section 133a of the act of one bansi tyre house pvt. ltd., exhibition road, patna.during the course of his deposition, the assessee declared rs. 4 lakhs as his income and that the aforesaid income is with the assessee in the form of cash. based on this addition alone and without any corroborative evidence, the assessing officer made an addition of rs. 4 lakhs to the returned income of the assessee. in appeal, the commissioner of income-tax (appeals) deleted the aforesaid addition by observing as follows : "it is none of the imputations of the assessing officer that he had in his possession any tangible material which may, even remotely, suggest that the appellant was found in possession of or accountable for any undisclosed income, business or transaction. the statement vide .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Reported in : (1986)18ITD397(Kol.)
1. this appeal filed by the department and the two cross-objections filed by the assessee are heard together and disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience.2. we first take up the appeal filed by the department which is directed against the order dated 22-3-1980 of the commissioner (appeals) relating to the assessment year 1976-77, the previous year of which ended on 31-12-1975.3. the assessee is a non-resident company doing banking business in india. its head office is in england and it is doing similar business in some other countries also.4. the first ground taken by the department in this appeal states that the commissioner (appeals) erred in deleting the addition of the interest of rs. 44,55,972 made by the ito. during the year under consideration, the assessee considered certain debts due to it as of doubtful recovery. nevertheless, he charged interest on those debts and debited those amounts to the personal accounts of the debtors. however, the corresponding credits for the interest so debited was not given to the current profit and loss account but was given to a suspense account. the case of the assessee was that the interest though charged in the books of the assessee did not represent the real income of the assessee because the principal amounts themselves were of doubtful recovery and so the realisation of the interest thereon was still more doubtful. the ito disallowed the claim of the assessee on the ground that the assessee had not written .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Reported in : (1986)18ITD551(Kol.)
1. the assessee is a company which is engaged in the manufacture of soft drinks. prior to the assessment year 1979-80 it produced soft drinks under the brand names of limca and gold spot. during the assessment year 1979-80, i.e., from 15-2-1978 it started manufacture of a new soft drink under the brand name of thums up and for marketing the new product it incurred advertisement and publicity expenses of rs.2,23,208. the assessee contended before the iac that no part of the advertisement and publicity expenditure incurred by it could be disallowed under section 37(3a) in view of the provisions contained in section 37(3d) of the income-tax act, 1961 ('the act'). the iag rejected the said contention by observing, inter alia, that no separate industrial undertaking had been set up by the assessee for the production of thums up as "the same industrial undertaking which was producing and continues to produce the other brand of beverage, namely, gold spot and limca produces this brand thums up also with the same plant and machinery". according to the iac the assessee did not set up any separate plant or machinery for production of its new brand of soft drink 'thums up'. the commissioner (appeals), however, found that the assessee installed a new chilling plant, a filler plant and other machinery including bottles and cases at a cost of rs.16,36,723 and since the assessee had set up a new industrial undertaking for the manufacture and production of a new brand of soft drink, it .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Reported in : (1993)45ITD610(Kol.)
1. the appeals are by the department and the cross objections are by the assessee. since they were heard together, they are consolidated and disposed of by this common order.2. we are concerned with the assessment years 1980-81 and 1981-82. in the assessment made originally under section 143(3) read with section 144b, the ito had allowed depreciation of rs. 16,65,000 and rs. 14,12,359 respectively in respect of certain non-factory buildings held by the assessee. subsequently, the ito invoked the provisions of section 154 of the it act on the ground that the building which was purchased from satna cement works for a consideration of rs. 37 lakhs had not become the property of the assessee since no registered conveyance deed was executed in favour of the assessee. according to the ito, under section 32 of the it act, the assessee, in order to become entitled to depreciation in respect of the assets used in its business, should be the 'owner' of the assets. the ito was of the view that though the assessee had paid the entire purchase price and had also used the building for the purpose of the business and had also earned income therefrom which was charged to income-tax, was not eligible for depreciation in respect thereof in the absence of legal ownership. he also referred in this connection to the note made by the auditors in the printed accounts and balance-sheet which stated that the registration in respect of the buildings is yet to be executed. in coming to this conclusion .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Reported in : (1995)54ITD82(Kol.)
1. this appeal is by the assessee and it is directed against the order of the cit passed under section 263 of the income-tax act.2. the assessee is a partnership firm carrying on business in export of hosiery goods as well as in knitting in respect of the export of hosiery goods the assessee is eligible for deduction under section 80hhc of the act while claiming the deduction, the assessee treated the interest of rs 13,14,045 on fixed deposits with banks as its income from business and claimed deduction on that amount also the claim was allowed by the assessing officer when he completed the assessment under section 143(3) of the act.3. on 25-7-1991, the cit issued notice to the assessee under section 263 he observed that the interest was taxable under the head "other sources" and the assessing officer had wrongly treated the same as business income and had also allowed deduction under section 80hhc on the same the cit was of the view that this action of the assessing officer was erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of revenue he, therefore, proposed to revise the assessment order.4. the assessee by letter dated 8-8-1991 brought to the notice of the cit that the interest income was a part of the business income as the investment in the fixed deposit was made in the course of and as part of the assessee's business activity it was pointed out that the assessee had obtained a loan of rs 1 09 crores from indian overseas bank and for that purpose the entire fixed deposits .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Reported in : (1996)59ITD150(Kol.)
1. as all the five appeals involve common issues so far the sake of convenience we are taking them up altogether to be disposed of by this consolidated order it may also be noted that w. t. a. no. 51 (cal.) of 1993 is an appeal by the assessee and pertains to the assessment year 1988-89, whereas the rest of the four appeals [being nos. 62 to 65 (cal.) of 1993] are preferred by the department and they pertain to the assessment years 1984-85 to 1987-88. all the above five appeals have been preferred against the common order of the cwt (a) dated 12-8-1992.2. the above four departmental appeals have been field by delay of one day. application for the condonation of the said delay has been field by he department. after hearing both the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the said delay is hereby condoned and the appeals are admitted.3. shortly stated relevant facts leading to these appeals are that the assessee-company is in occupation of an immovable property situated at 6/1/2, queen's park, calcutta. the said property belongs to one smt.swati choudhury who let it out to dhruba kumar sen as tenant in june 1971. there having been a dispute between smt. swati choudhury, lessor and dhruba kumar sen, the then tenant. the said dispute was resolved by an arbitration award dated 18-12-1982 wherein among other things it was provided that the lessor/land-lady will execute the lease deed for 99 years in favour of dhruba kumar sen or his nominee. subsequently .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Reported in : (1996)59ITD137(Kol.)
1. this is an appeal field at the instance of the assessee-trust against the order of the cit (a)-iii, calcutta dated 27-9-1991 for the assessment year 1989-90.2. the assessee owns a premises which was let out to m/s. new jatinga valley tea estate ltd. on rent. the assessing officer has found during the course of completion of assessment that a sum of rs. 1,36,212 is due from the said company towards the rent payable to the assessee-trust. as sri s. chatterjee, director in that company, happens to be the son of the trustee sri p. c. chatterjee, the assessing officer has examined the facts with reference to the provisions of sec.13(1)(c) of the it act. the assessing officer found that though the amount towards rent is not paid by the company m/s. new jatinga valley tea estate ltd., the assessee-trust has not taken any steps for realisation of the said rent and hence the non-realisation thereof amounts to violation of the provisions of sec. 13(1)(c)/13(3) of the act. the assessing officer has also held that the assessee has not taken any adequate security from the persons referred to in sub-section (3) of sec. 13 in spite of the said trust-amount held with the said-company and hence it amounts to violation of provisions of sec.13(2)(a) 11 of the act for the year under consideration.3. aggrieved thereby, the assessee filed an appeal before the cit (a) where it was contended that the tenant m/s. new jatinga valley tea estate ltd. has been occupying the building before the trust .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Reported in : (1990)35ITD136(Kol.)
1. this appeal by the revenue and the cross objection by the assessee: m/s. b.k.a. v. birla (huf) are directed against the order of the commissioner of income-tax (appeals) dated 29-6-88. both in the appeal as well as in the cross objection, the dispute relates to computation of capital gain arising out of sale of shares of m/s. zenith steel pipes & industries ltd. (hereinafter referred to as'zenith steel'.) 2. the brief facts relating to the controversy are that the assessee acquired 11,533 shares of zenith steel in the year 1961. these shares were retained as "investment" till 1972 when the shares were converted into stock-in-trade. between the years 1975 and 1979 the assessee was further allotted 14,430 bonus shares of zenith steel. the total shareholding of the above company was again converted to investment on 9th september, 1982. all the shares were sold in august 1984. the assessee earned a profit of rs. 6,18,141 on sale of shares and claimed the same to be long term capital gain.3. from and out of the capital gain shown, the assessee claimed deduction under section sot as also the benefit of section 54e of the act for having invested the sale consideration as provided in the section. the ito, however, treated the gain as short term capital gain and, therefore, did not give the benefit either of section 54e or section 80t of the act. the whole of capital gain was charged to tax.4. the assessee challenged the assessment of capital gain in appeal before the cit( a) and .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Reported in : (1991)37ITD518(Kol.)
1. this appeal by the revenue for the assessment year 1984-85 is directed against the order of the cit (appeals) dated 16-5-1988. the following grounds of appeal have been raised : 1. on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, learned cit (a) erred in holding that the leave and licence fee of rs. 8,25,000 payable to everlite pvt. ltd. is allowable as revenue expenses. 2. on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, learned cit(a) erred in deleting the disallowance of rs. 8,25,000 being leave and licence fee payable to everlite pvt. ltd. 3. on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, learned cit(a) erred in directing to allow investment allowance on boring rigs not used for investment allowance for the purpose of assessee's business. 4. on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, learned cit(a) erred in directing to exclude the expense for hiring registered taxies from the purview of calculation for disallowance under section 37(3a).2. the first three grounds being covered by orders of appellate tribunal in assessee's own case for earlier years we would take up the last ground of appeal first. the facts relating to the said ground are that on scrutiny of the "conveyance account" the assessing officer found that taxi hire charges, bus fare, tram fare, auto rickshaw hire charges, etc. were debited in the above account. he was of the view that taxi hire charges were covered by provisions of section 37(3a) of the income-tax act. from the details, the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Reported in : (1991)38ITD558(Kol.)
1. these two appeals by the assessee for the assessment years 1985-86 and 1986-87 are directed against the order of cit(a) dated 16-10-1989.the common issue relates to taxability of interest received by assessee under agreement of sale dated april 2,1983 from the purchaser.2. as per the agreement, the assessee firm agreed to sell its salt manufacturing plant with machineries, factory sheds, land and building and stock-in-trade to sourashtra chemicals, porbander for a total consideration of rs. 37 lacs. it received a sum of rs. 8,25,000 near about dewali 1983 at the time of agreement of sale. the balance amount of rs. 28,75,000 was to be received on or before 2-4-1985 the time fixed for execution and registration of conveyance deed. it was stipulated in the agreement that on the balance stipulated payment the vendee would pay interest. for various reasons the matter of transfer and registration was held up and purchaser paid sum of rs. 5,32,689 and rs. 5,80,310 as interest in the period relevant to the assessment years 1985-86 and 1986-87. the assessee claimed that aforesaid amounts were not taxable income as the interest was received on "capital account".the assessing officer did not accept this claim and charged the interest realised to tax.3. the issessee impugned the assessment orders in appeal before the cit(a) and contended that so long the deed of conveyance was not executed and registered, the relationship between the assessee and the purchaser was not that of .....
Tag this Judgment!