Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: interest tax act 1974 section 19 revision of order prejudicial to revenue Sorted by: recent Court: allahabad Page 1 of about 42 results (0.075 seconds)

Shyam Biri Works (P.) Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Allahabad

Reported in : (2003)84ITD124(All.)

..... he passes the order and, accordingly, it cannot be taken into consideration by the commissioner for the purposes of invoking this jurisdiction under this section, for he is not an appellate authority under the section and exercises only revision all jurisdiction and hence he can take into consideration only the record as it stood before the income-tax officer and the materials in such record for the purpose of ascertaining whether the order in question was erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue. ii. ..... we are constrained to note, though at the cost of repetition, that cit(c) has issued show-cause notice under section 263 of the income-tax act, 1961 mainly relying upon the order under section 132(5) and that the assessing officer accepted the revised return without properly examining the seized material in all the assessment years under consideration. ..... moreover, when the explanation offered by the assessee was accepted by the commissioner of income-tax with regard to the alleged undisclosed income of rupees one lakh, there was no error in the order passed by the income-tax officer in the case of the assessee in the assessment year 1974-75. .....

Sahara India Mutual Benefit Co. Ltd. Vs. Asstt. Cit

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : (2002)74TTJ(All)67

..... the commissioner being of the view that the order of the income tax officer for the year 1959-60 was prejudicial to the interest of the revenue, issued a notice under section 33b of the 1922 income tax act to bankey behari lal, the legal heir of the deceased assessee, to show-cause why action under section 33b of the act should not be taken ..... order under section 263 passed by the commissioner was contrary to the provisions of section 263 explanation clause (c) of the income tax act, 1961, and that the commissioner (appeals) in the appellate order for assessment year 1994-95 had considered the matters in respect of which the order under section 263 has been passed, as issue of deposits as well as, interest payable on them was subject-matter of appeal before the commissioner (appeals) and consequentially the commissioner had no jurisdiction under section 263 for revising ..... . it is contended that the income tax officer has allowed depreciation at the rate of 2.5 per cent only and the same rates should be taken for disallowance under section 40(a)(v) taking the depreciation in that manner,'(iii) after this appeal to the appellate assistant commissioner, which was disposed of on 3-4-1974, the commissioner issued a notice dated 5-3-1975, under section 263 except to this very assessment year, ..... . the petitioner firm was assessed for the purpose of income-tax filed returns for the assessment years 1972-73, 1973-74 and 1974-75 along with copies of the profit & loss accounts and balance .....

Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Ashok Kumar Goel

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : (2000)163CTR(All)149; [2000]244ITR755(All)

..... (ii) whether the order of the commissioner of wealth-tax under section 25(2) could be held to be without jurisdiction on the ground that there was no order prejudicial to the revenue at the time of issue of the notice under section 25(2) dated january 24, 1976, discussed in the aforesaid order ? ..... against the aforesaid order of the commissioner, the assessee preferred an appeal to the income-tax appellate tribunal which set aside the order of the commissioner on the ground that when the commissioner issued the notice under section 25, the assessment order had already been rectified by the assessing officer and, therefore, it could not be said to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue.6. ..... by this reference under section 27(1) of the wealth-tax act, 1957, the income-tax appellate tribunal, delhi bench 'a', delhi, has referred the following question for the opinion of this court :'whether, the tribunal was in law justified in setting aside the order under section 25(2) passed by the commissioner of wealth-tax on the ground that it lacked jurisdiction at the time of issue of the notices under section 25(2) ?'2. ..... the commissioner of income-tax on noticing that the said liability was not allowable by virtue of section 2(m)(ii) of the wealth-tax act, 1957, issued a notice under section 25(2) of the wealth-tax act proposing to revise the assessment. ..... the respondent's assessment to wealth-tax was made by order dated march 16, 1974, in which a liability amounting to rs. .....

K.N. Agrawal Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : (1991)100CTR(All)170; [1991]189ITR769b(All)

..... ) is directed against a show-cause notice issued by the commissioner of income-tax under section 263 of the income-tax act, 1961, calling upon the petitioner to show cause as to why the assessment order dated september 21, 1978, relating to the assessment year 1975-76 be not revised.2. ..... settled that for invoking the power under section 263, two grounds must exist, namely, (i) the order proposed to be revised must be erroneous and (ii) it must be prejudicial to the revenue. ..... he would invoke his power of revision and keep it pending awaiting the decision of a higher court or authority to put it in the language of section 263, can he, in such a case, act on the footing that the order of the assessing authority is erroneous after giving our earnest consideration to the matter, we are of the view that it is difficult to sustain the exercise of reviewing power in such a situation for the simple reason that the order of the assessing authority cannot be ..... of the opinion that the entire share income is assessable in the hands of the petitioner alone and the assessment made by the income-tax officer to the contrary is erroneous in law and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue. ..... course of hearing, a doubt arose in our minds whether the commissioner can invoke his revising power under section 263 with a view to keep the dispute alive, awaiting the decision of the supreme ..... to the one mentioned in the impugned show-cause notice had arisen in respect of the assessment years 1966-67 to 1974-75. .....

Raj Kishore Prasad Vs. Income-tax Officer and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : [1983]144ITR904(All); [1984]16TAXMAN403(All)

..... perusal whereof would indicate that the commissioner was of the view that as the assessee had failed to file an estimate of the advance tax under section 212(1) penalty was leviable in this case ; but the ito had not charged that interest hence the assessment made by him was prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. ..... proceedings initiated under section 263 of the income-tax act for the assessment year 1974-75 have been dropped ..... feeling aggrieved went up in appeal before the income-tax appellate tribunal on the ground, inter alia, that he was not afforded an adequate opportunity to put up his defence before the commissioner because the notice under section 263(1) of the act was dated 27th september, 1976, while the order passed by the commissioner was dated 30th september, 1976 ..... the contention of the petitioner was that in view of the order passed by the income-tax appellate tribunal setting aside the order of the commissioner dated 30th september, 1976, the original order of assessment dated5th october, 1974, as rectified by the order dated 5th february, 1975, has become operative, in our view, (is correct) ..... be stated here that after the commissioner had passed his order dated 30th september, 1976 (annexure 3) the ito proceeded again to assess the petitioner with respect to assessment year 1974-75 and he passed the order of assessment dated 15th february, 1977 (annexure 4), which was subsequently rectified under section 154 of the act vide annexure 5. ..... which was revised to rs .....

Yogesh Agarwal and Others Vs. Estate Officer and Others

Court : Allahabad

..... order of demolition under section 5b, to make an order directing the sealing of such erection or work or of the public premises in which such erection or work has been commenced or is being carried on or has been completed in such manner as may be prescribed, for the purpose of carrying out the provisions of this act ..... specified in the order provided that no order under this sub-section shall be made unless ..... the provisions of sub-section (1) by any person, the estate officer may, by order, remove or cause ..... be taken under this act or in accordance with the terms of the authority aforesaid, make an order, for reasons to ..... order under section 5 within twelve days from the date of publication of the order under sub-section (1) of that section; (b) in the case of an appeal from an order under section 5b or section 7, within twelve days from the date on which the order is communicated to the appellant; and (c) in the case of an appeal from an order under section 5c, within twelve days from the date of such order ..... ) act, ..... order, remove or cause to be removed the building or ..... order was made under section 5b for the demolition or removal of such building or other structure or fixture, the appellate officer shall not make any order for the stay of enforcement of such order ..... act either for the eviction of persons who are ..... act ..... section ..... interest by making available for public use premises belonging to central government, companies in which the central government has substantial interest ..... order ..... tax ..... 1974 .....

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Rashid Exports Industries

Court : Allahabad

..... revision of orders prejudicial to revenue - (1) the commissioner may call for and examine the record of any proceeding under this act, and if he considers that any order passed therein by the assessing officer is erroneous insofar as it is prejudicial to the interests of the revenue, he may, after giving the assessee an opportunity of being heard and after making or causing to be made such inquiry as he deems necessary, pass such order thereon as the circumstances of the case justify, including an order enhancing or modifying the assessment, or cancelling the assessment and directing ..... in our opinion, the only issue which we are required to decide is "whether the commissioner of income tax was justified in revising the order of the assessing authority under section 263 of the act on the ground that the assessment order was prejudicial to the interest of revenue". ..... from the aforesaid discussion, it is apparent that the expression "prejudicial to the interests of revenue" appearing in section 263 of the act has to be read in conjunction with "erroneous" and that every loss of revenue as a consequence of the assessment order could not be treated as prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. ..... the supreme court held that even if the order is erroneous but is not prejudicial to the interests of revenue in which case recourse to section 263(1) of the act could not be taken. .....

Manas Sewa Samiti Vs. Chief Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Allahabad

..... prescribed authority is required to examine cases where an applicant does not apply its income during the year of receipt and accumulates it but makes payment therefrom to any trust or institution registered under section 12aa or to any fund or trust or institution or university or other educational institution and to that extent the proviso states that such payment shall not be treated as application of income to the ..... including audited annual accounts) or information from the fund or trust or institution or any university or other educational institution or any hospital or other medical institution, as the case may be, as it thinks necessary in order to satisfy itself about the genuineness of the activities of such fund or trust or institution or any university or other educational institution or any hospital or other medical institution, as the case may be, and the ..... section 10(23c) (iiiad) of the income tax act (hereinafter referred to as the act ..... on advertisement like a commercial activity to promote the business activities to earn more and more profits; (iv) the assessee has made huge loans/advances to the interested persons/concerns in violation of 3rd and 13th proviso to section 10(23c)." 5. ..... held that advancing of an interest free temporary loan by one society to another society having similar objects is neither an "investment" nor a "deposit" and, therefore such loan given does not violate the provisions of section 13(1) (d) read with section 11(5) of the act. 11. .....

Commissioner of Income-tax-II, Agra Vs. Shimbhu Mehra

Court : Allahabad

..... valuation authority under sub-section (1) has not been disputed in any appeal or revision or no reference has been made before any other authority, court or the high court, the assessing officer may refer the valuation of the capital asset to a valuation officer and where any such reference is made, the provisions of sub-sections (2), (3), (4), (5) and (6) of section 16a, clause (i) of sub-section (1) and sub-sections (6) and (7) of section 23a, sub-section (5) of section 24, section 34aa, section 35 and section 37 of the wealth-tax act, 1957 (27 of 1957), shall, with ..... - for the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that "transfer" includes and shall be deemed to have always included disposing of or parting with an asset or any interest therein, or creating any interest in any asset in any manner whatsoever, directly or indirectly, absolutely or conditionally, voluntarily or involuntarily, by way of an agreement (whether entered into in india or outside india) or otherwise, notwithstanding that such transfer of rights has been characterised as being effected or ..... the tribunal for a different reason, confirmed the order of the ist appellate authority. 10. ..... all the appeals involve the same question of law and are being disposed of by a common order. .....

Ravi Agarwal Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-II, Bare ...

Court : Allahabad

..... to a fixed rate of dividend whether with or without a right to participate in profits) holding not less than ten per cent of the voting power, or to any concern in which such shareholder is a member or a partner and in which he has a substantial interest (hereafter in this clause referred to as the said concern)] or any payment by any such company on behalf, or for the individual benefit, of any such shareholder, to the extent to which the company in either case possesses accumulated profits ..... should not be treated as a deemed dividend in view of the provision of section 2(22)(e) of the income tax act (hereinafter referred to as the "act"). ..... the appellant thereafter preferred an appeal before the high court under section 260a of the act, being income tax appeal no.190 of 2014, in which it was held that the tribunal had not considered the nature of the transaction of the company before determining as to whether the exclusionary clause (ii) of section 2(22)(e) of the act was attracted or not and, accordingly, remanded the matter to the tribunal for a decision afresh ..... in order to appreciate the submission of the learned counsel for the parties, it would be appropriate to consider the provision of section 2(22)(e) of the act. ..... no decision was cited before us wherein a view has been taken that in order to show that a part of the whole to be treated as "substantial part", the part must exceed 50% of the whole. ..... we find from a perusal of the order of the tribunal that sarnath finance co. .....