Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Reported in : (1985)11ITR587(Mum.)
1. The assessee individual is a Development Officer in the Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC). For these assessment years under appeal, the assessee claimed that the entire amount of conveyance allowance received by him from the LIC, was incurred by him for procuring insurance business. The assessee maintained a car. He produced before the ITO, the vouchers for the purchase of petrol, oil, etc. The ITO held that part of the expenses claimed must relate to personal use by the assessee of his motor car. He disallowed 20 per cent of the conveyance allowance as on personal account and added it up as perquisites in the total income. The assessee was in receipt of bonus commission from the LIC, for procuring more business for the Corporation. It was claimed before the ITO that substantial amounts had to be spent by the assessee for encouraging the agents. 25 per cent of the amounts received as bonus commission was claimed by the assessee as incurred for procuring more business. Accor...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Reported in : (1985)14ITD298(Mum.)
1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee-company against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) Bombay.2. The assessee is a limited company and the appeal relates to the assessment year 1979-80. Among the claims before the ITO in the course of the assessment proceedings, one was that the preliminary expenses of Rs. 4,95,435 shown on the assets side of the balance sheet should be taken into account in working out the capital employed for the purpose of relief under Section 80J of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act').This claim was not accepted by the ITO. It was brought to our notice at the time of the hearing of the appeal that this claim was also made by grounds of appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) but was, not considered by him. The assessee-company has, therefore, come up in the present appeal before us.3. The assessee's learned counsel, Shri Lalkaka, pointed out that the preliminary expenses of Rs. 4,95,435 appearing on the assets side of the balance sheet were for publi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Reported in : (1986)16ITD195(Mum.)
1.This appeal arises out of the income-tax assessment of Shri K.G. Vyas (the appellant). The assessment year is 1979-80, for which the previous year was the Samvat year 2034. The assessee is assessed in the status of an individual. During this year, the assessee sold his residential flat in a building known as 'Giriraj' on Altamount Road for Rs. 2,37,000. He had acquired this flat some 10 years earlier for Rs. 44,250. Out of the sale proceeds of this flat, the assessee acquired the following four flats in a building known as 'Dattani Apartments', Kandivli. The particulars of the four flats purchased by the assessee are the following:18-1-1979 25 2nd Appellant and his son Shri Dhairyawan16-2-1979 35 3rd Appellant and his son Shri Ambrish8-3-1979 15 1st Appellant and his son Shri Suryakant The total amount invested in the purchase of these four flats was Rs. 1,77,750. In computing the capital gains arising from the sale of his residential flat on Altamount Road, the appellant claimed de...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Reported in : (1986)18ITD256(Mum.)
1. Out of these nine appeals, five have been filed by the department, while the remaining four have been filed by the assessee. The departmental appeals relate to the assessment years 1975-76 to 1979-80, while the appeals filed by the assessee relate to the assessment years 1975-76 to 1977-78 and 1979-80.2. We shall first deal with the appeals filed by the department. The first ground raised is that the learned Commissioner (Appeals) had erred in holding that the amounts of dividends and royalty which are required to be excluded in terms of Rules 1(viii) and 1(ix) of the First Schedule to the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964 ('the Act') are the gross amounts and not the net amounts of dividends and royalty.This ground is common to all the five assessment years. The amounts involved are mentioned in the orders of the authorities below and need not be mentioned in this order. The learned representative for the assessee has relied on the decisions in CIT v. Jupiter General Insurance ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Reported in : (1986)18ITD303(Mum.)
1. This four appeals by the assessee have been heard together with the consent of the parties and are being decided by this common order.2. The assessee is an unlimited company incorporated with effect from 22-1-1981. The main objects of the assessee-company are to conduct research in the field of science to acquire and establish medical research and to run hospitals, dispensaries, nursing homes and to acquire, establish, provide medical aid running laboratories and factories for research in and production of chemicals, drugs and Pharmaceuticals. For the assessment year 1982-83, the assessee filed a return showing income at nil. In the relevant accounting year, the assessee had derived income by way of interest. The company had share capital of Rs. 62 lakhs out of which an amount of Rs. 59,13,000 had been given as loans to various companies, with the result that the assessee derived an interest income of Rs. 4,41,743. The assessee filed profit and loss account in which this receipt wa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Reported in : (1986)18ITD226(Mum.)
1. This Special Bench was constituted to consider the question whether provisions of Section 40A(8) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') are applicable to assessment year 1976-77, irrespective of previous year followed by the assessee. A Bombay Bench had expressed the opinion that it would, while a Madras Bench had held that Section 40A(8) would apply only to expenditure on interest incurred after 1-4-1976.2. The assessee-company manufactures Pharmaceuticals, drugs and milk products. Its accounting year ended on 30-6-1975 which is relevant for the assessment year 1976-77 (year under consideration). The ITO had disallowed under Section 40A(8) Rs. 3,11,040. The only discussion in the assessment order as per paragraph 10 is that (assessee) has correctly shown disallowance at the rate of 15 per cent of Rs. 20,73,598 (out of interest paid) amounting to Rs. 3,22,040. Before the Commissioner (Appeals), the assessee raised an additional ground challenging the disallowance under Section 40A...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Reported in : (1987)22ITD223(Mum.)
1. This is an appeal by the revenue objecting to the cancellation of the order passed by the ITO rectifying the assessment acting under s.2. The assessee is a private limited company. The original assessment for the year 1980-81 had been completed wherein deduction under s. 80J had been granted to the tune of Rs. 23,279. There were unabsorbed losses of 1978-79 and 1979-80 aggregating to Rs. 1,28,846. In the regular assessment, the deduction under Section 80MM had been granted before setting off the unabsorbed losses. The ITO was of the view that this was a mistake apparent from the record and that relief under Section 80MM could be granted only after setting off the carried forward of the unabsorbed losses from the total inoome of this year.He, therefore, noticed the assessee, extended an opportunity of being heard and passed the impugned order whereby he held that the unabsorbed losses for 1978-79 and 1979-80 should be first set off from the current year's income. After such set off,...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Reported in : (1988)24ITD68(Mum.)
1. These four appeals-two by the assessee and two by the Revenue-are against the order of the C.I.T.(A) for the assessment years 1980-81 and 1981-82. They are being1 disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience.2. In the assessee's appeals for both the years, the first ground is concerning the applicability of the provisions of Section 44B of the IT Act. It was submitted by the learned counsel for the assessee Shri Dastur that though a similar point has been decided against the assessee by the Tribunal for the assessment years 1975-76 and 1976-77 by order in Anchor Line Ltd. v. ITO [1984] 10 ITD 63 (Bom.) and for asst. yrs. 1977-78 to 1979-80 in I.T.A. No. 3151 (Bom.)/81, 810 (Bom.)/1982 and 4433 (Born.)/1982 dated 29-4-1985 following the decision in Anchor Line Ltd.'s case (supra) the said decision requires reconsideration in view of later decision of the Patna High Court in the case of CIT v. Sriram Agrawal [1986] 161 ITR 302.3. The assessee is a non-resident shippin...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Reported in : (1988)25ITD479(Mum.)
1. This appeal by the assessee has raised several issues which are considered seriatim below. (i) Swastik Household & Industrial Products, (ii) Sarabhai Research Centre and (iii) Operation Research Group. A company, M/s. Karamchand Premchand Pvt. Ltd., transferred and assigned as a going concern on 30-6-1973 its various industrial undertakings and businesses to its wholly-owned subsidiary. While doing so, with effect from 30-6-1973, that company had transferred and assigned its industrial undertaking of Swastik Oil Mill division as a going concern to the assessee-company. With effect from the close of business of the assessee as on 28-2-1977, the assessee-company which had in the meanwhile set up two divisions, Swastik Research Centre and Operation Research Group, in 1974, transferred the industrial undertakings and businesses of Swastik Household & Industrial Products Division, business of Operation Research Group and the Sarabhai Research Centre to its subsidiary company, M/...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Reported in : (1988)27ITD351(Mum.)
1. These departmental appeals, though worded differently, raise a common issue regarding taxability of compensatory city allowance (for all the years), house rent allowance (for 1976-77 and 1977-78) and dearness allowance (for 1977-78, 1978-79 and 1980-81). There is an additional ground about taxability of encashment of leave for the assessment years 1977-78 and 1978-79 and taxability of professional income from Maharashtra State Industrial and Investment Corporation for the assessment year 1978-79. The assessee is a solicitor by profession.He was at the relevant time Solicitor and Jt. Secretary to the Govt. of Maharashtra (Law and Judiciary Department). The main issue in all these appeals and cross-objections is that dearness allowance, compensatory city allowance, house rent allowance and compensation for surrender of earned leave are not taxable and that professional tax is deductible.We shall deal with each of these issues separately.2. As regards the taxability of dearness allowa...
Tag this Judgment!