Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Patna
Reported in : (1983)6ITD275(Pat.)
1. The appellant-assessee by his present appeals challenges the first consolidated appellate order dated 23-2-1981, of the learned AAC, for the assessment years 1970-71 to 1976-77. The assessee is a resident-individual by status and the valuation dates are the relevant financial years ending 31st March of each year.2. The appeals are against a consolidated order. The facts, circumstances, parties and issues are identical. For the sake of convenience, therefore, we propose to dispose of all the appeals by a single order.3. The first common ground of the assessee's appeals during all the years under consideration is to the following effect: For that the learned Wealth-tax Officer and AAC have erred by now allowing mango orchard as exempt under Section 5(1)(iva) of the Wealth-tax Act.4. The assessee is said to have purchased 9.19 acre, i.e., 6 kathas of land sometime during 1970. There are said to be about a dozen trees there in the said plot. The value of the said plot of land was refle...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Patna
Reported in : (1985)13ITD369(Pat.)
1. This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 3-3-1984 of the AAC, the previous year of which ended on 31-3-1980.2. The assessee is an individual deriving income from pension and business as a dealer in Indane Gas.3. The only dispute in this appeal is whether the salary paid by the assessee to his manager, who happens also to be his wife, could be added under Section 64(1)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') to the income of the assessee or the said salary is excludible from such inclusion under the proviso to the said section. The case of the assessee was that his wife was acting as the manager of the Indane business while the assessee was looking after the work relating to the Bank, attending other office work and the matters generally connected with the places outside its business premises. The manager was solely incharge of the business premises, the godown where the Indane Gas is stored and running the business of storing and supplying the gas cyli...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Patna
Reported in : (1987)20ITD358(Pat.)
1. Wealth-tax appeals filed by the department in respect of the assessments of the assessee pertaining to the assessment years 1978-79 to 1981-82 and the cross-objections filed by the department for the assessment year 1978-79 were heard together on 16-7-1986. Appeals filed by the department in respect of income-tax assessments of the assessee pertaining to the assessment years 1980-81 and 1981-82 were heard on 17-7-1986. After considering the rival submissions, these appeals and the cross-objections are being disposed of by a common order, as the main issue involved in these appeals is the same.2. Shri Nathmal Choudhary, his wife and their son, Ram Autar Choudhary, were members of a Mitakshara undivided family. The HUF had owned certain movable and immovable properties. Shri Nathmal Choudhary died in 1959, i.e., he died after coming into force of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. The assessee-HUF while filing its wealth-tax return for the assessment year 1978-79 claimed for the first t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Patna
Reported in : (1987)20ITD730(Pat.)
1. Appeal filed by Phoolchand Bharmal Agrawal pertaining to his assessment for the assessment year 1984-85 and the appeals filed by Rajesh Kumar Phoolchand Agrawal pertaining to his assessments for the assessment years 1983-84 and 1984-85 were, for the sake of convenience, consolidated and heard together as the question arising for consideration in these appeals was the same.2. The dispute arising in these appeals is with regard to the status in which the assessments should have been made.3. Shri Phoolchand Bharmal Agrawal was the kartra of the HUF. The family was as under : ------------------------------------------------------------ | | | | Rajesh Kumar Shaila Devi Kumari Nita Kumari Nanda (son) (daughter) (daughter) (daughter) | It was claimed before the WTO that there had been a complete partition of the HUF as on 18-3-1983. The WTO passed an order under Section 20 of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 recognising the complete partition.4. On this partition, certain properties had been allo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Patna
Reported in : (1987)20ITD94(Pat.)
1. While the assessee is in appeal for the assessment years 1974-75 to 1979-80, the revenue is in appeal for the assessment years 1976-77 to 1978-79. As these appeals involve consideration of a common issue, these are combined together and disposed of by this common order.2. We first take up the appeal filed by the assessee for the assessment year 1974-75 One of the issues which is common for all the years both in the appeals filed by the assessee as well as those filed by the revenue is regarding the claim of assessee for deduction under Section 80J of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'). The assessee, a company, had taken over a running business of a partnership concern Hindustan Tools & Dies, Laxmi Mansion, Bistupur, Jamshedpur with all its assets and liabilities. Soon after taking over this business from Hindustan Tools & Dies, Laxmi Mansion, the assessee launched a scheme of expansion and diversification of the manufacturing job which was done by the existing business. T...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Patna
Reported in : (1993)47ITD549(Pat.)
1. This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the Id. DC (A) dated 6-12-1990. The assessee is a Director of BCCL and received coal field allowance during the year under appeal. He claimed that 50 per cent of this allowance should be considered as non-taxable in view of several decisions of the ITAT. The Assessing Officer while framing the order under Section 143(1) had allowed Rs. 1,200 only as non-taxable. The assessee had filed a petition under Section 154 requesting the Assessing Officer to rectify the order, but the said request was rejected by the Assessing Officer stating that the ITATs decision relied by the assessee are no more in force in view of Board's Circular No. 517, dated 16-6-1988. In that Circular Board has directed that only the excess over 100 per month or 50 per cent of the actual colliery allowance paid by the Coal India Limited whichever is more is to be treated as perquisite and the balance amount of the payment of the said allowance may be ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Patna
Reported in : (1992)43ITD259(Pat.)
1. This appeal is directed against the order of the learned Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), [hereinafter described as DC (Appeals) for short], dated 16-9-1991 confirming the penalty levied under Section 271 B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (naming of the Act hereinafter, omitted). The appeal relates to the assessment year 1989-90.2. In the opinion of the Assessing Officer (AO for short), as the assessee did riot file the audit report under Section 44AB within the stipulated time under Section 139(1), it was liable for penalty under Section 271B. He issued a show-cause notice to the assessee asking for explanation. It was the reply of the assessee that though'the books of account were audited and certificate under Section 44AB was obtained before due date, it could not be furnished as the return inadvertently was not filed within the time stipulated under Section 139(1) due to illness of the partner, who was looking after the Income-tax matters, it had escaped his mind. He ul...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Patna
Reported in : (1993)45ITD61(Pat.)
1. These two cross appeals were filed objecting certain decisions of the ld. CIT (Appeals) in his order dated 30-6-1992. The assessee objected to the disallowance of Rs. 22,742 paid as interest and the revenue objected to the deletion of addition made under Sections 69 & 69A(sic) of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter naming of the Act is omitted).2. The assessee is an individual. He is a Director of M/s Bharat Engineering & Body Building (P.) Ltd. and one of the partners of M/s B.F. Industries. The assessee had paid interest on loans amounting to Rs. 22,742 during the year. The parties to whom the interest was paid were as follows:- 5. V. Dayal Khuntelal Rs. 8,676 ----------- The payment of these interest was claimed as deduction from income earned by the assessee. The Assessing Officer disallowed the claim as according to him the claim does not satisfy the conditions of Section 57(iii). He had given various reasons which can shortly be described as follows:- He pointed out that th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Patna
Reported in : (1993)45ITD63(Pat.)
JUDGMENT ASSESSMENT--Non-compliance with requirement of s. 143(2).Where there is non-compliance of requirement of section 143(2) best judgment assessment is justified even though no fresh notice is given under section 142(1) and 143(2) after filing of return.Mere technical lapse, if it is assumed to be a lapse, of not giving a fresh notice and asking the assessee to produce the books of account, could not be treated as lack of notice subsequent to the filing of the returns of income. The assessing officer has made the assessment ex-parte under section 144 only in the absence of supporting books of account and documents. Therefore, certainly there was non-compliance even with the requirement of section 143(2) requiring the assessee to produce the relevant books of account in support of the returns of income. Even for such non-compliance the assessment could be made under section 144.Charitable trust--EXEMPTION UNDER S. 11--Higher income determined in assessments.Assessee was entitled to...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Patna
Reported in : (1993)45ITD101(Pat.)
1. While the Revenue is in appeal for the assessment years 1977-78, 1978-79, 1979-80 and 1980-81, the assessee is in cross-objection for the assessment year 1977-78 only.2. We first take up the appeals of the Revenue for disposal. As these appeals raise common contentions, these are combined together and taken up one after the other for disposal.3. We first take up the appeal for the assessment year 1977-78. One of the issues raised in this appeal is that the assessee-Karimia Trust, Sakchi, according to the ITO, was hit by the provisions contained in Section 13(1)(bb). This provision which has now been omitted by the Finance Act, 1983, read as under: "In the case of a charitable trust or institution for the relief of the poor, education or medical relief, which carries on any business, any income derived from such business, unless the business is carried on in the course of the actual carrying out of a primary purpose of the trust or institution will not be excluded from the total inc...
Tag this Judgment!