Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chandigarh
Reported in : (2007)292ITR268(Chd.)
1. In this case, the Chandigarh Bench of the Tribunal for asst. yrs.1990-91 to 1992-93 in ITA No. 1333/Chd/1994, ITA Nos. 944 and 1591/Chd/1995 vide order dt. 22 Nov., 1996 held that deduction under Section 80M is permissible on the net dividend to be determined after deducting proportionate administrative expenses and also deduction allowed under Section 36(1)(iii) from the gross dividend. The assessee's appeal against the decision of the Tribunal is pending in the High Court. In the present case, the assessee made a request for constitution of the Special Bench in respect of common issue relating to computation of deduction under Section 80M as in the case of Mahavii Spinning MMs Ltd. in ITA No. 26/Chd/1996 for asst. yr. 1991-92 vide para 2 of its order the Tribunal held that no expenditure can be deducted on proportionate basis out of the common administrative expenses for the purpose of computation of deduction under Section 80M.The request of the assessee was accepted by the Pres...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad
Reported in : (1987)23ITD505(Ahd.)
1. The only point involved in these appeals is whether the status of the assessee is "AOP" as held by the ITO or "HUP" as claimed by the assessee and accepted by the AAC.2. The assessment years involved are 1980-81 and 1981-82 and the relevant previous years are S.Ys. 2035 and 2036 respectively.3. The facts of the case as narrated by the ITO and not in dispute are : The co-sharers of the assessee are co-sharers of HUF of Shri Thakershi Chunilal Parikh assessed by ITO Cir. I-A. The said HUF of Shri T.C. Parikh would be called as larger HUF. It consists of following co-sharers : The HUF of Rashmikant Thakershi consists of the following co-sharers : 3. There had been a partial partition during the previous year S.Y. 2034 relevant to the A.Y. 1979-80 in respect of a sum of Rs. 1,20,000. 4. The above partial partition has been accepted by the ITO Cir. I/A, A'bad vide order dtd, 18-3-1981. All the above HUFs have filed their returns of income in this Ward and have named the HUF Nos. 1 to 6 ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Reported in : (1998)66ITD305(Delhi)
1. The Assessing Officer has submitted this Miscellaneous Application under section 254(2) seeking rectification of the order of the Tribunal dated 30-9-1994 in ITA No. 7641/Delhi/1989. It has been pointed out in the said application that an assessment for assessment year 1983-84 was made by the Assessing Officer on 12-1-1989. This was the first assessment and not a case of re-assessment made under section 147.Since no return was earlier filed by the assessee and no assessment was earlier made, it was not a case of re-opening an assessment made earlier. The Assessing Officer had therefore rightly charged interest under sections 139(8) and 217 of Income-tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal has deleted the interest levied under sections 139(8) and 217 by holding that such assessment made by the Assessing Officer under section 147 cannot be treated as regular assessment. Reliance has been placed on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Modi Industries Ltd v. CIT [1995] 216 ITR ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad
Reported in : (2006)101TTJ(Ahd.)232
1. These two appeals by the assessee are against the orders of CIT(A) for the asst. yrs. 1999-2000 and 2000-01. Since the common dispute is raised in the appeals these are decided by this common order for the sake of convenience.2. The common dispute raised is whether CIT(A) is right in upholding the rectification of intimation/orders of the AO under Section 143(1) by invoking the provisions of Section 154 of the Act. The assessee's industrial undertaking is located in backward area of Daman. It is entitled to deduction under Section 80-IB. The returns of income for the assessment years under consideration were filed in which the deduction under Section 80-IB was claimed on the total income computed without deduction of depreciation, though allowable to the assessee but not claimed. These returns were processed under Section 143(1) and intimations issued/deemed to have been issued on the basis of the returned income. Subsequently, the AO formed an opinion that claim of the assessee un...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Madras
Reported in : (1986)18ITD114(Mad.)
1. These appeals have been posted before this Bench for considering the following question : Whether depreciation as per Income-tax (Fourth Amendment) Rules, 1983 is to be allowed in all cases which were pending on 2-4-1983 irrespective of the assessment year involved or is to be allowed only in 1984-85 and subsequent assessment years [in view of the divergent views of the Tribunal Benches in the case of Rayalaseema Passenger & Goods Transports (P.) Ltd. v. I AC [1984] 7 ITD 111 and ITO v. Bharat Roadways [1985] 12 ITD 647 (Cal.)].2. Originally the reference to the Special Bench was made in the case of Rajapalayam Mills Ltd., Rajapalayam in IT Appeal No. 547 (Mad.) of 1985 in which Shri S. Swaminathan, the learned counsel for Sri Rani Lakshmi Gng., Spg. & Wvg. Mills (P.) Ltd., Madurai entered appearance as an intervener. In the course of the hearing the appeal in IT Appeal No. 566 (Mad.) of 1985 in the case of Sri Rani Lakshmi Gng., Spg. & Wvg. Mills (P.) Ltd. was also tak...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Cochin
Reported in : (2004)267ITR52(Coch.)
1. These appeals, all by the Department, have been placed before the Special Bench in the following circumstances.2. The assessee is a scheduled bank. In respect of the assessment years under consideration, it claimed deduction in respect of debts written off under the provisions of Section 36(1)(vii) of the Act. The AO found that the assessee had made provision for bad and doubtful debts and that the actual write-off of debts was less than the provision and, therefore, in terms of the proviso to Section 36(1)(vii); the assessee was not entitled to any deduction in respect of the write-off. The assessee contended before the AO that the amount actually written off in the books as bad debts represented non-rural advances, that the proviso to Section 36(1)(vii) would apply only in respect of rural advances written off as bad and, therefore, notwithstanding the fact that the actual amount written off is less than the provision for bad and doubtful debts, the assessee would be entitled to ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad
Reported in : (1992)41ITD375(Ahd.)
1. The assessee-firm derives income from manufacture and sale of castings for electric motors, pumps, hot plates etc. A return of income declaring an income of Rs. 15,46,290 was submitted on 27th July, 1984.2. The only point of dispute in this appeal relates to disallowance of interests paid to Arvind Metal Industries Ltd. Welfare Trust of Rs. 26,386 and Arvind Metal Industries Staff Welfare Trust of Rs. 27,377, totalling Rs. 53,763. The brief facts relating to aforesaid disallowance are that the appellant had settled an amount of Rs. 1000 on 20th March, 1983 for the benefit of its labourers and staff members.During the accounting year ended on 31st March, 1983 i.e., relating to assessment year, 1983-84, the appellant had contributed a sum of Rs. 2 lakhs each to both the aforesaid trusts on 20lh March, 1983. The amount was handed over to both the trusts and the trustees of these two trusts decided to earn interest on the said amount of Rs. 2 lakhs. Both the trusts accordingly deposite...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT IT
1. Facts in brief giving rise to the issue to be decided by the Special Bench 1.1 Prior to the amendments made by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1991, which received the assent of the President on September 27, 1991, Sub-sections (1) and (1A) of Section 245D were as under : "245D. (1) On receipt of an application under Section 245C, the Settlement Commission shall call for a report from the Commissioner and on the basis of the materials contained in such report and having regard to the nature and circumstances of the case or the complexity of the investigation involved therein, the Settlement Commission may, by order, allow the application to be proceeded with or reject the application : Provided that an application shall not be rejected under this sub-section unless an opportunity has been given to the applicant of being heard. (1A) Notwithstanding anything contained in Sub-section (1), an application shall not be proceeded with under that sub-section if the Commissioner objects to the app...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT IT
Reported in : (1992)195ITR792ITAT
1. Prior to the amendments made by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1991, Sections 245D(1) and 245D(1A) read as under : "245D. (1) On receipt of an application under Section 245C, the Settlement Commission shall call for a report from the Commissioner and on the basis of the materials contained in such report and having regard to the nature and circumstances of the case or the complexity of the investigation involved therein, the Settlement Commission may, by order, allow the application to be proceeded with or reject the application : Provided that an application shall not be rejected under this subsection unless an opportunity has been given to the applicant of being heard. (1A) Notwithstanding anything contained in Sub-section (1), an application shall not be proceeded with under that sub-section if the Commissioner objects to the application being proceeded with on the ground that concealment of particulars of income on the part of the applicant or perpetration of fraud by him for evading...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT IT
1. Vide application dated December 18, 1991, the applicant stated that, during the course of hearing of the case by the Principal Bench at Delhi, on November 27 and 28, 1991, the applicant had requested for waiver of interest under Sections 234A, 234B and 234C of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 1989-90, under the special and all pervasive powers of the Settlement Commission. To this, the Commission had remarked that it did not have powers to waive interest under Section 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act. By the petition dated December 18, 1991, referred to above, the applicant requested that he may be allowed another opportunity of being heard on the point whether the Commission, on the facts and circumstances of the case, has the powers to waive the above-referred interest. According to the petitioner, since the subject was of very wide import and of far-reaching consequence, he had no objection if the hearing on the above subject was fixed before the Special Bench at ...
Tag this Judgment!