Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Reported in : (1983)6ITD225(Kol.)
1. The assessee is the State Bank of India which is established under the State Bank of India Act, 1955. These appeals are taken together and are disposed of by a common order. The assessment for the assessment year 1972-73 was completed on 25-7-1974. A notice under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') was issued upon the assessee on 7-3-1977 indicating that the ITO had reason to believe, in consequence of information in his possession, that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for the assessment year 1972-73. The notice issued under Section 148 for initiating proceedings under Section 147(b) of the Act was served upon the assessee on 10-3-1977. The assessee filed its return showing an income of Rs. 14,18,69,048. Further, the assessee, in a covering letter, stated that according to the knowledge of the assessee no income has escaped assessment for the year 1972-73.The ITO found that the assessee was allowed incorrect relief under Section 80M of the Act which ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Reported in : (2004)88ITD35Cal
1. This Special Bench was constituted under Section 255(3) on the recommendation of the Division Bench of the Tribunal for considering the issue as to whether the amount received by the assessee in terms of the consent decree passed by the Small Causes Court is mesne profit and whether it is taxable as a capital receipt or revenue receipt. We have heard the parties and perused the record including the order of the "E" Bench of the Tribunal in assessee's own case in I.T.A. Nos. 2690/C/97, 2953/C/94, 1413/C/97, 709-1 l/C/99, 1108/C/99 for assessment years 1990-91 to 1995-96 and 1997-98.2. The relevant facts briefly stated are that the appellant is a partnership firm. The appellant owned certain shares of Shree Nirmal Commercial Ltd. By virtue of its shareholdings, it had acquired the occupancy rights in respect of 21st Floor of 'Nirmal Building' at Mumbai along with car parking space No. 32 in the basement of the building. The appellant had entered into a Leave & Licence agreement i...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Reported in : (2004)267ITR61(Kol.)
1. This Special Bench was constituted under Section 255(3) on the recommendation of the Division Bench of the Tribunal for considering the issue as to whether the amount received by the assessee in terms of the consent decree passed by the Small Causes Court is mesne profit and whether it is taxable as a capital receipt or revenue receipt. We have heard the parties and perused the record including the order of the "E" Bench of the Tribunal in assessee's own case in ITA Nos. 2690/C/97, 2953/C/94, 1413/C/97, 1413/C/97, 709-11/C/99 for asst. yrs. 1990-91 to 1995-96 and 1997-98.2. The relevant facts briefly stated are that the appellant is a partnership-firm. The appellant owned certain shares of Shree Nirmal Commercial Ltd. By virtue of its shareholdings, it had acquired the occupancy rights in respect of 21st floor of 'Nirmal Building' at Mumbai along with car parking space No. 32 in the basement of the building. The appellant had entered into a leave & licence agreement in respect ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Reported in : (1992)41ITD582(Kol.)
..... powers conferred by section 251(1)(a) of the act. the addition of rs. 625 lakhs was a new source of income outside the subject-matter of assessment appealed against. it was not an item which was disclosed by the assessee in the return or to which the assessing officer had applied his mind. such new source could not be brought to tax by the learned cit(a) under his enhancement powers. shri dastur relied upon the decision of the hon'ble supreme court ..... shri dastur, the learned counsel for the assessee, contended before us that the assessee had constituted the benevolent fund in terms of settlement arrived at with the workers under section 2(p ..... confirmed. the assessee has brought the issue in further appeal before the tribunal.37. we have heard the parties, shri dastur cited certain decisions in support of the claim that reimbursement ..... due date applicable in his case for furnishing the return of income under sub-section (1) of section 139 of the act. thus, if the main section is considered along with first proviso and both are harmoniously ..... certain items of machinery. for the sake of convenience, these disputes raised in different grounds of appeal are being taken together. the assessee, in the relevant period, carried on business of manufacturing tyres, tubes and allied articles ..... india hotels v.state [1987] 70 stc 10. he further held that the assessee was not entitled to waiver of interest under rule 40 of the income-tax rules, 1962 read with sub-section (4) of section 215 as the writ .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Reported in : (1982)1ITD160(Kol.)
..... issued a further notice calling upon the appellants to appear before him, so that they might be given an opportunity of being heard. he also intimated that if no appearance was made, then he would proceed to determine the question of penalty, taking into consideration only the written statement which had been filed earlier. before, however, the ito could decide the case, the appellants filed a petition under article 226 of the constitution for the issuance of the writs of prohibition or some other appropriate writ against the ito. the matter went up to the supreme court ..... confers power on the government to grant exemption from sales tax, the government can legitimately be held bound by its promise to exempt the appellant from payment of sales tax. it is true that taxation is a sovereign or governmental function, but no distinction can be made between the exercise of a sovereign or governmental function and a trading or business activity of the government, so far as the doctrine of promissory estoppel is concerned.21. their lordships of the supreme court in arriving at the above conclusion have followed the following decisions :union of india ..... ,870------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 3. later on, the ito came to know that certain loans which had been accepted by him as genuine in the ..... non-filing or delay in filing of returns in response to notices under section 139(2)/148 or under the corresponding section of the indian income-tax .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Reported in : (2005)96TTJ(Kol.)1041
1. These 4 appeals of the assessee relating to asst. yrs. 1992-93, 1993-94, 1994-95 and 1995-96 involving some common issues are disposed of by this consolidated order.2. The appellant is a branch of ABN AMRO Bank NV incorporated in Netherlands, with limited liability having its original office at Singapore. In India, the appellant is registered as a scheduled bank in terms of Schedule II of the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) Act, 1934. The main activities of the appellant in India comprise of accepting deposits, giving loans, discounting/collection of bills, issue of letters of credit/guarantees, executing forward transaction in foreign currencies for importers/exporters, money market lending/borrowings, investment in securities, etc., in terms of the existing rules and regulations governing such transactions. In the years under consideration, the appellant had three branches in India at Mumbai, Kolkata and New Delhi. There is an agreement between India and Netherlands for Avoidance of ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Reported in : (2003)87ITD653Cal
1. This appeal is directed against the order dt. 27th Feb., 1998, passed by the CIT (West Bengal-I), under Section 263 of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), and in the matter of 'no objection certificate' issued by the Dy. CIT, Spl. Range 11, Kolkata, authorizing CESC Ltd. to remit a sum of UK 52,000 to one M/s Mott Ewbank Preece of UK, after deducting the tax at source @ 5 per cent of the gross amount.2. Although the assessee has raised nine grounds of appeal, we deem it fit and proper to begin with addressing ourselves to the core grievance of the assessee that the 'no objection certificate' sought to be revised by the impugned order was not prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue inasmuch as, consequent to the 'no objection certificate' in question, the assessee had to deduct tax at source @ 5 per cent whereas no tax was really required to be deducted at source from the remittance in question.3. Briefly, the facts. CESC Ltd. also known as Calcutta Electrici...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Reported in : (2008)112ITD57(Kol.)
1. This Special Bench has been constituted under Section 255(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the Hon'ble President, I.T.A.T. in the case of M/s. I.T.C. Ltd. vide I.T.A. No. 1541 (Cal)/2000 for assessment year 1997-98 to consider the following questions: (1) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble CIT(A) has erred in deleting addition of Rs. 38,64,1091-debited to year's revenue account as value of stores written off by holding that it is for the A.O. to prove that consumable stores had either not been used or individually costed less than Rs. 5,0001-ignoring, in the process, the findings in assessment that claim could not be established on record. (2) That, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble CIT(A) has erred in deleting addition of Rs. 5,00,000/- on account of building, furniture, fixture & fittings thereby contravening enunciation by the jurisdictional High Court to the defect that prohibition against guest house expenses s...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Reported in : (2003)79TTJ(Kol.)915
1. The appeals filed by the assesses are directed against the common order dt. 16th Dec., 1998, passed by the CIT(A) for the asst. yrs.1985-86 and 1986-87.2. The main effective common ground in these cases is that the lower authorities refused to carry forward the business loss of the assessee for the asst. yrs. 1985-86 and 1986-87 for setting off with his business income for subsequent assessment year on the ground that the returns for the said assessment years were filed late.3. The learned counsel for the assessee stated that the lower authorities were not justified in refusing to carry forward the business loss claimed by the assessee. It was further contended that while refusing to carry forward the business loss the AO failed to take note of several judicial decisions to the effect that return of income filed under Section 139(4) should be deemed to have been filed under Section 139 of the IT Act and consequently, the business loss determined on the basis of such belated return ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Reported in : (1984)8ITD537(Kol.)
1. All these appeals involve common points. They are disposed of by a common order.2. In these appeals, filed by the assessee, various grounds regarding valuation have been taken. But at the time of hearing the following common additional ground has been raised: For that the return of wealth for the relevant assessment year having filed along with the disclosure after the statutory period provided under the Wealth-tax Act, the said return is an invalid one and non est in the eye of law and as such the assessment made by the Wealth-tax Officer on the basis of the said invalid return is illegal and invalid and is also barred by limitation.Since the additional ground is pure question of law, the same is admitted. In support of the plea raised in the additional ground Dr.Pal for the assessee contended that the assessments made are invalid and illegal inasmuch as the returns on the basis of which proceedings for assessments were taken, are not returns under the Wealth-tax Act, 1957('the Ac...
Tag this Judgment!