Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Reported in : (2006)7SOT26(Mum.)
The first ground of objection (Ground Nos. 1 to 3) taken by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) in disallowing the claim for exemption under section 10A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.In this case the assessee filed the return on 22-10-2001 declaring income of Rs. 32,700 along with Balance Sheet, Profit and Loss Account and Auditors' Report. The case was selected for scrutiny and notice was issued under section 143(2) of the Act.Assessee is engaged in the business of cutting, polishing and exporting diamonds, labour job in diamonds and dealer in computer hardware and software. Assessee claimed exemption of Rs. 25,87,826.50 under section 10A of the Act, being a newly established undertaking in free trade zone. Assessee set up a new manufacturing unit at EPZ, Sachin in Gujarat. The nature of business in the requisite format, certified by the Auditor, has been mentioned as "manufacturers and exporters of diamonds" and the date of commencement of manufact...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Per: P.G. Chacko, Member (J). The appellant is engaged in the manufacture of what are referred to as "RCC cement blocks" in one of the show-cause notices, "concrete blocks" in another one and "cement blocks" in the rest of the notices. They filed a classification list effective from 23.6.1988 describing their products as "hollow/solid cement blocks constituting components of prefabricated buildings falling under Heading 94.06" and claiming the benefit of concessional rate of duty under Notification No.64/88-CE dated 1.3.1988. This and two other classification lists filed upto 1990 were approved. In respect of classification lists filed thereafter, however, only provisional approval was given in view of a classification dispute which arose between the department and one M/s. Excon Building Materials Manufacturing Co. Pvt. Ltd. in respect of identical goods. [It appears from the records that, after the dispute was settled by the Tribunal in favour of the Revenue in Excon case, the depart...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
R.G. Ketkar, J. 1. This confirmation case as also the Criminal Appeal No.528 of 2008 arise out of the judgment and order dated 03.08.2011 passed by the Special Court (under the N.D.P.S.Act), Greater Mumbai, in N.D.P.S.Case No.60 of 2002. 2. By that order, the learned Sessions Judge found Gulam Mohammad Malik (hereinafter referred to as ‘Accused No.1’) guilty for having committed offence under section 8 (c) punishable under section 20(b) (ii) punishable under section 31- A of the Narcotics and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short the ‘Act’) - for having been previously convicted for the offence punishable under section 8 (c) read with Section 20(b) vide Sessions Case No.01/2002 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sabarkantha, Himmatnagar, Gujarat State. Consequently, the Special Court sentenced the Accused No.1 to death and ordered that he shall be hanged by neck till death. The execution of the sentence is subject to the confirmation of this Court. The Spe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Reported in : (1983)LC(1973)DTri(Mum.)bai
1. The Additional Collector of Central Excise and Customs, Nagpur has filed an appeal against Order No. S/49-94/81 GC (Nagpur) dated the 10th day of November, 1982 passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals), Bombay.2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that on 7-4-1981, Preventive Officers, Amravati Division, during the course of checking of the accounts and stock of the respondent found that he was in possession of primary gold weighing 592.200 gms. He had a gold smith's licence. As per provisions of Section 42(ii) a goldsmith can have 300 gms. and thus the respondent had 292.200 gms. gold in excess as per the version of the appellant. A show cause notice dated 22-7-81 was issued to the respondent to show cause why penal action should not be taken on him under Section 74 of the Act and why the seized gold should not be confiscated under Section 71 of the Act. Respondent had filed a reply.The officers bad asked only for GS 13 register. Respondent had also obtained a Gold Dealer's Li...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Reported in : (1988)24ITD211(Mum.)
1. This appeal involves a question of inclusion in the net wealth of the value of certain gold bonds which had matured before the valuation date. The assessee was the holder of National Defence Gold Bonds, 1980, and the date of redemption of these bonds was the 27th October, 1980.The valuation date is 31-3-1981. The assessee had not redeemed them and his contention has been that the value of the Bond is exempt from wealth-tax Under Section 5(1)(xvia). He has pointed out that the Govt.of India by a Press notification dated 23rd March, 1982, had extended the date of redemption of these Bonds up to 30th September, 1982. The Commissioner has considered the Press notification whereunder the repayment facilities were extended. The said Press Notification inter alia states as follows : Some holders of National Defence Gold Bonds, 1980 have not so far tendered their Bonds at the repayment centres. To avoid any inconvenience to them, facilities for delivery of Gold in repayment of these Bonds ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Reported in : (2002)(145)ELT196Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Vide final Order No. C-II/1392-93/2000/WZB dt. 9.5.2000, The Tribunal dismissed the appeals of the Revenue on the ground that each of the four show cause notices in question were dated later in the period of short levy that they sought to recover, relying upon the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector of Central Excise vs. Cotspun Limited [1999 (113)ELT 353 (S.C.)] and in the case of Rainbow Industries (P) Ltd. vs. Collector [1994 (74) ELT 3 (S.C.)]. It is the contention of the Ld. DR while arguing the application for rectification of mistake purported to have arisen in the Tribunals final order cited Supra that since the law was subsequently amended vide the Finance Act, 2000 validating action taken under Section 11A of Act, 1944 Central Excise Act during the period commencing on and from the 17.11.1980 till the date of the Presidents assent to the Finance Bill that the Bench ought to have hold that the demand was sustainable without dismissing the appeal...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2005(4)ALLMR463; 2005(6)BomCR207; 2005(4)MhLj967
Dharmadhikari B.P., J.1. In this Civil Revision Application under Section 115 of Civil Procedure Code, challenge is to the judgment dated 20-3-2003 delivered by Second Additional District Judge, Nagpur in R.C.A. 574/2001 in an appeal under Section 26-A of Provincial Small Causes Court Act (referred to as Provincial Act hereafter) whereby said Court has confirmed the judgment and decree dated 30-10-2001 delivered by Additional Judge, Small Causes Court Nagpur in Civil Suit No. 1435/1986. The revision applicant is the original tenant and defendant in Civil Suit and appellant in appeal. The present respondent obtained permission from Rent Controller under provisions of C.P. and Berar House Rent Control Order, 1949 and also from Competent Authority under the provisions of Slum Act and, then terminated tenancy of present revision applicant by issuing notice under Section 106 of Transfer of Property Act. When the revision applicant failed to comply with that notice, he filed above referred C...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Reported in : (2003)87ITD209(Mum.)
1. The only common ground raised in all these 13 appeals by the Revenue reads as under : "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) was not justified in holding that the AO erred in directing the assessee to deduct and pay tax under Section 195 of the IT Act while remitting hire charges to the non-resident owners of the ship." 2. A detailed order has been written by the learned CIT(A) which is available in ITA No. 6165/Bom/1995 file and for all the above appeals, he has followed the above order.3. The assessee-company had entered into series of charter-party agreements with several non-resident ship owners. The details of the ship owners, vessels, date of shipment and the charter charges paid are as under : 4. For the sake of convenience, the charter party agreement with Exmar NV of Belgium for the vessel "Polar Endurance" is taken as illustrative of the issue under consideration. The particular features and factual data relevant to the time char...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1991)91CTR(Bom)163; [1992]194ITR167(Bom)
Mrs. Sujata Manohar J.1. The assessee is a non-resident company incorporated abroad. It carries on the business of banking. In the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1967-68, it received interest amounting to Rs. 15,92,135 from various Indian concerns on the loans advanced to them by the assessee. From the interest so received, the assessee deducted a sum of Rs. 13,16,161 consisting of proportionate interest paid on the funds borrowed by the assessee which were used for advancing loans to the Indian concerns, and the proportionate expenditure on earning interest from the Indian concerns. After deducting the total amount of Rs. 13,16,161 from Rs. 15,92,135 it included the balance of Rs. 2,75,974 as income from interest in its total income in the income-tax return filed by it. This was accepted by the Income-tax Officer.2. For the said year, the assessee also received a sum of Rs. 2,77,717 as interest on taxable Government securities held by it. From this amount, the assessee ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : [1986]17ITD804(Mum)
ORDERPer Shri I. S. Nigam, Accountant Member - This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the AAC, T-Range, Bombay.2. The assessee is an individual and the appeal relates to the assessment year 1978-79. The assessment for this year was completed by the ITO under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act), and in the notice of demand accompanying the assessment order, the assessee was intimated that the assessee was also charged interest under section 139(8) of the Act for not filing an advance tax estimate. The assessee, therefore, moved a petition for rectification under section 154 of the Act for cancelling the interest charged under section 139(8) and section 217. The ITO, however, by order under section 154 rejected the assessees application under section 154. The AAC in appeal, agreed with the ITO on the issue and refused to interfere. The assessee has, therefore, come up in the present appeal before us.3. The assessees learned counsel Shri Mapara cited...
Tag this Judgment!