Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Reported in : (2000)73ITD230(Kol.)
..... , the interest of rs. 67,49,553 cannot be treated as income accrued to the assessee; there being diversion of income by overriding charge created by the statutes [both the coal mines (nationalisation) act, 1973 and the coking coal mines (nationalisation) act, 1972]. we, therefore, do not see any infirmity in the orders of the cit(a). the appeals filed by the revenue are, therefore, dismissed. ..... regard to the taxability of the interest payable by the government under the coal mines (nationalisation) acts. the facts giving rise to the dispute are as under.4. the assessee is a company incorporated under the u.k. companies act.it has coal mines in the state of bihar. the management of the coking coal mines was taken over by the central government on 17th october, 1971 and were .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Reported in : (1985)14ITD313(Kol.)
..... 1972-73 and should be adjusted with the income for the assessment year 1979-80, now under appeal. meanwhile, the coal mining business of the assessee-company was nationalised by the coal mines (nationalisation) act, 1973, and the assessee, thus, stood stripped of the colliery business though it did not become defunct of extinct. ..... the revenue has come up in appeal before us and it was contended by the departmental representative that by virtue of nationalisation of coal industry under the provisions of the coal mines (nationalisation) act the existing colliery business was entirely taken over by the government for which the assessee was given compensation. he, therefore ..... other hand, reiterated the same contentions as were advanced before the commissioner (appeals). he invited our attention to the relevant provisions of the coal mines (nationalisation) act, to show that the government took over the assets of the company but the liabilities were not taken over. he urged that development .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Reported in : (1984)9ITD539(Kol.)
..... amount of compensation payable in respect of the assets of the firm acquired was determined before the relevant valuation dates and it was specifically mentioned in the godhur coal mines nationalisation act that the amount of rs. 33,77,000 was payable as compensation to godhur colliery co. and out of that the only deduction was to be on ..... from 1-7-1971 onwards till 30-6-1972. none of these items includes the real compensation for the acquisition of the assets owned by the firm before nationalisation of the collieries. the income-tax assessment for the earlier year has, therefore, absolutely nothing to do with the computation of wealth of the assessee since ..... income receivable out of the compensation amount assessed in the hands of the firm but the compensation and other moneys awarded by the government on account of the nationalisation of the firm had not been included in this amount. therefore, the basis of computation adopted by the assessee was not correct. he deducted the interest .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Reported in : (1986)15ITD119(Kol.)
..... dated 12-11-1982 of the commissioner relating to the assessment year 1979-80.2. the assessee is a company which was formerly doing business in coal mining. this business was stopped as it was nationalised with effect from 1-5-1972. during the year under consideration, the assessee was receiving interest on the compensation amount receivable by it. on the ..... 593 under the head 'income from other sources'. at the same time, it had an income of rs. 37,505 under section 41(1) of the income-tax act, 1961 ('the act'). the ito set off the income of rs. 37,505 assessable under section 41(1) under the head 'profits and gains of business or profession' against loss of ..... off the loss under the head 'income from other sources' against the income under the head 'profits and gains of business or profession' under section 70(1) of the act. it may be stated that the loss did not relate to speculation business. evidently, the said loss was not under the head 'capital gains'.3. subsequently, the commissioner .....
Tag this Judgment!