Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Reported in : (2007)108ITD471(Mum.)
1. This is an appeal against the order of learned Commissioner (Appeals) confirmed the order of assessing officer under Section 115Q read with Section 115-O of Income-tax Act, 1961 ('Act'). The issue for our consideration is whether the assessee can be said to be in default under Section 115Q of the Act on account of non-payment of tax on distributed profits under Section 115-O of the Act in respect of payment made to Central Government out of the surplus profit.2. Brief facts of the case are these : The assessee, is a statutory Corporation, established by the Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956 ('LIC Act') for carrying on the insurance business. Such business is governed by the Insurance Act, 1938. While examining the assessment record and the accompanying documents and details furnished by the assessee, the assessing officer noticed that it had distributed surplus income /profit to its sole shareholder i.e., a Government of India as per Sections 28 and 28A of Life Insurance Corpora...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Reported in : (2002)82ITD749(Mum.)
1. All these five appeals by the assessee arise out of five separate orders of the learned CIT(A) dt. 28th Nov., 1995, 24th July, 1996, 30th July, 1997, 28th July, 1998 and 29th Oct., 1999, for asst. yrs.1992-93, 1993-94, 1994-95, 1995-96 and 1996-97 respectively. Approval of the Committee on Disputes permitting the assessee to pursue the appeals before the Tribunal is placed on record for the assessment years in question. Since the point of dispute is common in all the appeals, they are being disposed of by this combined order for the sake of convenience.2. The grounds of appeal taken by the assessee are quite narrative and argumentative which is contrary to ITAT Rules. However, the common issue is that the assessee in all these appeals is aggrieved against inclusion of interest on debentures, bonds and Government securities in the total amount of interest on loans and advances and subjecting it to interest-tax under the Interest-tax Act, 1974 (the Act).3. Assessee, that is, Life Ins...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
1. All these five appeals by the assesses arise out of five separate orders of the learned CIT(A), dt. 28th Nov., 1995, 24th July, 1996, 30th July, 1997, 28th July, 1998, and 29th Oct., 1999, for asst. yrs.1992-93, 1993-94, 1994-95, 1995-96 and 1996-97, respectively. Approval of the Committee on Disputes permitting the assessee to pursue the appeals before the Tribunal is placed on record for the assessment years in question. Since the point of dispute is common in all the appeals, they are being disposed of by this combined order for the sake of convenience.2. The grounds of appeal taken by the assessee are quite narrative and argumentative which is contrary to ITAT. Rules. However, the common issue is that the assessee in all these appeals is aggrieved against inclusion of interest on debentures, bonds and Government securities in the total amount of interest on loans and advances and subjecting it to interest-tax under the Interest-tax Act, 1974 (the Act).3. Assessee, that is, Life...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Reported in : (1999)68ITD205(Mum.)
1. This group of 16 appeals consists of 10 appeals filed by the Revenue against a common order of the learned CIT(A) for the five assessment years mentioned above. By that common order the learned CIT(A) has decided five appeals filed by the assessee against the orders of the IAC (Asstt) under s. 201(1) r/w s. 221(1) of the IT Act. Five other appeals were decided by him against the orders of the IAC (Asstt) for the above-mentioned assessment years for charging interest under s.201(1A) of the Act. While the learned CIT(A) allowed all the appeals against penalty orders under s. 201/221(1), he gave only partial relief so far as appeals of the assessee against order under s. 201(1A) were concerned. That is how, assessee is in appeal in five of its appeals before us. The sixth appeal filed by the assessee i.e. ITA No.4442/Bom/1987 is for the asst. yr. 1983-84 pertaining to AO's order under s. 221 r/w s. 201(1) in as far as the AO has directed the assessee to pay the amount of tax deductibl...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Reported in : (1993)45ITD424(Mum.)
1. These two appeals are by the assessee against the orders of the CIT (Appeals), for the assessment years 1988-89 and 1989-90. For the sake of convenience, both the appeals are being disposed of by this common order.2. In the appeal for the assessment year 1988-89, the first ground is against the assessment of a sum of Rs. 1,47,80,403 as short-term capital gains. On scrutiny of the assessee's accounts, the Assessing Officer noticed that till last year, the assessee was holding two properties (i) bungalow No. 8 at Grand Paradi, Kamps Corner, Bombay, occupied by one of the partners, Sri N.R. Kapur and (ii) a flat at Beach Candy Apartment, occupied by another partner Sri R.K.A. Kapur.The written down values of both the properties were Rs. 3,90,230 and Rs. 1,36,867 respectively. These two properties were claimed to have been transferred on 7-10-1986 to the respective occupant partners. The Assessing Officer asked the assessee to show cause why the provisions of Section 45(4) of the Incom...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Reported in : (1988)25ITD88(Mum.)
1. These appeals of the Revenue are directed against the consolidated order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) for the assessment years 1978-79 to 1980-81. The common issue is regarding commission paid to the assessee in the form of purchase of deferred annuity policy from the Life Insurance Corporation of India for these years deleted by the Commissioner on the finding that the premia paid by the employer company did not form either a perquisite or income of the assessee for the above years.2. The assessee Dr. Y.K. Hamied was appointed as the Managing Director of M/s. Chemical Industrial & Pharmaceutical Laboratories Ltd. for a period of 5 years with effect from 27-11-1976. The terms of his remuneration were approved by the Central Government on 17-6-1977 vide Ministry of Law, Justice & Company Affairs Letter No. 1/68/CL. VII/77.The terms included a salary of Rs. 5,000 per month plus 1 per cent commission on the net profits of the company computed in the manner laid ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Reported in : (1997)61ITD453(Mum.)
1. These are all appeals filed by various French nationals, who are all employees of Spie Capag, who have been assigned by their employer in France to carry out the various works relating to the contract of construction of Bandra and Worli Marine Outfalls for the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai. All the appeals involve the identical issues, viz, (a) whether the salary for the period when the assessees were out of India should be treated as salary earned in India and brought to tax on that basis and (b) whether the social charges which these foreign nationals are liable to contribute in France should be treated as if the French national has an over-riding title on the income from salary of French nationals and thereby it is only the net of salary be taxed or the gross salary without adjustment of the social charges.For the assessee, Senior Advocate, Mr. Dinesh Vyas argued and Mr.Arvind Modi, the learned Sr. Departmental Representative, represented the department's point of view...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Reported in : (2006)102ITD101(Mum.)
1. This Special Bench has been constituted by the Hon'ble President under Section 255(3). The issue referred to the Bench for the asst. yr.1990-91 is as under: Whether right to occupy premises belonging to a co-operative housing society are taxable assets under Section 40 of the Finance Act, 1983 in the case of a private limited company? Assessee has filed its return of wealth on 9th May, 1991 declaring a net wealth of Rs. 1,20,400. Assessee is a company. AO noticed that the assessee-company has not offered the value of the flat at Sterling Bay Co-operative Housing Society Limited for wealth-tax purpose. In response to notice under Section 17 of the WT Act, assessee filed the return on 5th May, 1994 declaring a net wealth of Rs. 1,20,373. Assessee made repeated contention that the flat is not includible in the net wealth of the assessee. This is because the land and building belonged to the society and not to the assessee since it is merely an occupier of the flat. AO rejected the abo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Reported in : (1984)8ITD296(Mum.)
1. The appeal is filed by the department. The several grounds contested in the departmental appeal are dealt with seriatim below.2 to 4. [These paras are not reproduced here as they involve minor issues.] 5. Deferred payment of Annuity Policy: In connection with the application of Section 40A(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') the ITO included a sum of Rs, 42,000, premium paid by the company towards a deferred annuity policy, in favour of the managing director.The facts of the case are that the managing director, Shri Rahul Kumar Bajaj, was entitled to commission at a particular rate in addition to his fixed salary and other items of remuneration and perquisites. By a resolution of the Board, the company resolved that the commission payable to Shri Rahul Kumar be spent by the company every year towards the purchase of a deferred annuity policy from the LIC on the life of the managing director to provide for payment of annuity to him for life and upon his death to dependents. A...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Reported in : (1987)21ITD648(Mum.)
1. This appeal by the department relates to the assessment year 1981-82.2. The assessee was working as agent for procuring insurance business on behalf of Life Insurance Corporation of India. The terms and conditions of his employment as agent were governed by Life Insurance Corporation of India (Agents) Regulations, 1972. The assessee received Rs. 30,000 as gratuity from the LIC in the relevant previous year. The assessee claimed that this amount was not includible in the total income because provisions of Section 10(10) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, applied in respect of the said amount. The ITO rejected the claim on the ground that Section 10(10) applied to gratuity received by employee from employer and the assessee was not the employee of LIC but was an agent and as such, said provisions did not apply. The assessee filed appeal and the AAC held that the agent appointed by LIC under the said regulations would come within the ambit of the term "employee" in Section 10(10) and as suc...
Tag this Judgment!