Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: marriage laws amendment act 2003 section 6 transitory provision Court: income tax appellate tribunal itat delhi Page 2 of about 99 results (0.140 seconds)

Gaurav Khullar Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Reported in : (2007)110TTJ(Delhi)914

1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the CIT(A)-XXVI, New Delhi dt. 13th July, 2005 for the asst. yr. 2002-03, in the matter of order passed under Section 143(3) of the IT Act, 1961, wherein following grounds of appeal have been raised: 1. The impugned order of the learned AO is bad in law, is devoid of jurisdiction, is arbitrary, based on conjectures and surmises, passed without application of mind, without granting proper opportunity to defend and without following the proper legal procedures against the principles of natural justice. As such, the order is null and void ab initio. 2. The order is against the provisions of the Act and the appellant denies his liability to tax as determined and computed by the learned AO and the manner in which it has been so determined or computed. The learned CIT(A) has erred in law in upholding the legal validity of the impugned order, whether in specific terms or by implication. 3. The learned AO has erred in law and on ...

income-tax Officer Vs. Ramji Lal Gansham Das

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Reported in : (1989)31ITD127(Delhi)

1. The revenue has preferred these appeals for the four assessment years 1973-74 to 1976-77. The CIT (A) had disposed of these four appeals by his common order dated 14th April, 1986. The objection of the revenue is on the cancellation of the penalties levied on the assessee for the concealment of incomes under Section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act. The quantum of penalties levied were Rs. 44,862, Rs. 30,395, Rs. 33,197 & Rs. 40,072 for the assessment years from 1973-74 to 1976-77 2. The brief facts of the case are brought out below. The business premises of the assessee firm and the residential premises of the partners were searched on 29th Dec. 1981. The seized documents included duplicate set of cash book and ledger which were marked for identification as Nos. 57 & 58, 59, 55 & 56, and 50 relating to the assessment years 1973-74, 1974-75, 1975-76 and 1976-77 respectively.The ITO co-relating the items appearing in the seized books and the regular books of accounts was able t...

Deputy Commissioner of Vs. Kicha Sugar Co. Ltd.

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

1. In this case, the Full Bench is formed under the following circumstances : The appeals are by the Department whereas the cross-objections are preferred by the assessee. They are for the assessment years 1983-84 and 1984-85, respectively. These matters came up for hearing before a Division Bench comprising the then President Shri Ch. G. Krishnamurthy and Shri J. P. Bengra, Judicial Member. During the course of hearing of these appeals, the Division Bench felt that there were conflicting decisions rendered by the Tribunal in this very case of the assessee while disposing of its appeals for the previous years and in order to resolve the said conflict of decisions, the formation of the Full Bench was felt necessary. In fact on June 4, 1992, the Division Bench recorded the following docket Note : " In these appeals, the question is whether the bonus paid by the assessee was customary bonus or ex gratia. If it is the former, it is allowable as a deduction. For the assessment years 1979-8...

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Eicher Goodearth. (Eicher

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

1. All these appeals relate to the same assessee and, therefore, the same were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. We will first deal with ITA No. 1627/Del/1994 which has been filed against order under s. 250 passed by the Dy. CIT, Special Range-2, New Delhi, to give effect to the order of the CIT(A) dt. 7th August, 1992.2. Shri Ajay Vohra, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the assessee, submitted that, this appeal was inadvertently filed before the Tribunal instead of filing the same before the CIT(A). He, however, requested that the CIT(A) may be directed to condone the delay in filing the appeal, now before him, which has occurred on account of filing of the appeal inadvertently before a wrong forum. He relied upon the decision Continental Construction Ltd. vs. Union of India (1990) 185 ITR 230 (Del) to support this contention.3. The learned senior Departmental Representative submitted that appeal against the order of the AO is not maintainable b...

Sikkim Janseva Pratisthan (P.) Vs. Dy. Cit, Spl. Range-26

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Reported in : (2006)5SOT487(Delhi)

All the above appeals by the assessee are directed against common order of Commissioner (Appeals)-I, New Delhi dated 6-11 -1998 for assessment years 1992-93 to 1995-96.Briefly the facts are that the assessee -company is deriving income from dividend and interest etc. The assessee-company was treated as foreign company in the earlier years. Even for the assessment years under reference, the assessee had admittedly filed returns in the status of a foreign company. However, the assessee-company has shown income from dividend and interest and in the computation of total income, the assessee-company has claimed the deduction under section 80GGA(a)(ii) of the Income Tax Act on account of contributions made to various institutions approved for the purpose of deductions under section 35(1)(ii) of the Income Tax Act. The assessing officer was of the view that since the assessee-company is a foreign company, the same was liable to tax at the rate of 25 per cent on gross amount of dividend, inte...

Assistant Commissioner of Income Vs. O.P. Chawla

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Reported in : (2008)116TTJ(Delhi)755

1. This appeal, preferred by the Revenue, is directed against CIT(A)'s order dt. 9th Feb., 2001 relating to asst. yr. 1995-96. The only ground taken in this appeal by the Revenue is as under: Based on facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred in holding the assessment order dt. 30th March, 2000 to be bad in law and ab initio null and void and annulling the same without going into the merits of the addition of Rs. 28,90,000 made by the AO under Section 68 on account of unexplained NRE gifts.2. Shri B.D. Kharab, CIT-Departmental Representative along with Shri R.P. Meena, senior Departmental Representative appeared for the Revenue whereas Shri Rahul Khare, advocate, appeared on behalf of the assessee. 3.1. The assessee derived income from house property, from salaries, short-term capital gains and other sources. He filed return of income for the assessment year in question on 30th March, 1996 showing income at Rs. 4,42,350. The return was processed under Section 1...

Amarpali Mercantile (P.) Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Reported in : (1993)45ITD386(Delhi)

1. This appeal arises from the order dated 24-7-1991 passed by Miss S.K. Nigam, Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-I, New Delhi and the only ground raised is as under : The CIT (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in disregarding the cash basis of accounting consistently followed by the appellant and in holding that the appellant could not maintain its accounts on cash basis for purposes of income-tax while maintaining the same on accrual basis under the Companies Act consequent to the amendment of the Companies Act w.e.f. 15-6-1988.2. The assessee is a limited company engaged in the business of financing and investment. The assessee was following cash system of accounting since inception as could be seen from the assessment order for assessment year 1986-87. The problem arose because during the financial year ended on 31-3-1989, Section 209 of the Companies Act was amended by the Companies (Amendment) Act, 1988, w.e.f. 15-6-1988 whereby it was made mandatory for all companies to mai...

Jhalani Tools (India) Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Reported in : (1999)69ITD273(Delhi)

1. This is an appeal by assessee against an order of CIT(A)-17, New Delhi pertaining to asst. yr. 1992-93. The assessee originally raised the following grounds : "1. That, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the order of the CIT(A) confirming the action of the AO in making the prima facie adjustment and its disallowing the claim of deduction by way of IPRS received by the assessee under s. 143(1)(a) is bad in law and deserves to be set aside. 2. That the Revenue authorities erred in disallowing the claim of the assessee of IPRS receipt being capital in nature while determining and computing the income under s. 143(1)(a) of the Act. The said receipt under this section could not be adjusted as the same was debatable in nature. 3. That since the regular assessment under s. 143(3) in the present case stood finalised, assessment proceedings under s. 143(1)(a) stood automatically closed and no demand on account of these proceedings could be freshly raised by way of additional tax. 4...

Vinod Khatri Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Reported in : (2004)82TTJ(Delhi)911

1. The Hon'ble President of the Tribunal has constituted this Special Bench to consider and decide the following question in the above captioned appeal: "Whether the Tribunal fees on an appeal against the order of penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) is governed by Clause (d) of Section 253(vi) or Clauses (a) to (c) of Section 253(vi) of the IT Act whereas the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) directly relate to the assessed income?" 1.1 The question as framed and as reproduced above appears to be confusing as the last part of the last sentence is misleading. Hence, for more clarity we modify the questions and reframe the same as under: "Whether the Tribunal fees on an appeal against the order of penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) is governed by Clauses (d) of Section 253(6) or Clauses (a) to (c) of Section 253(6) of the IT Act." 2. The relevant facts, giving rise to the issue for the consideration of the Special Bench are being narrated in brief, as under: 3. The assessee filed I...

Mridu Hari Dalmia Vs. Income-tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Reported in : (1984)7ITD761(Delhi)

1. The main contention raised by the assessee in this appeal is that the 'fair rental value' of the rent-free accommodation at 1-Tis January Marg, New Delhi, provided to him by his employer cannot exceed its standard rent as fixed by the Additional Rent Controller at Rs. 27,500 per annum and, consequently, its value determined by the authorities below at Rs. 1,10,000 is not sustainable.2. The assessee, Shri Mridu Hari Dalmia, is the executive director of Orissa Cement Ltd., Rajgangpur. Orissa Cement Ltd. had taken on lease one of the three flats at 1-Tis January Marg, New Delhi, from its owner Hari Bros. (P.) Ltd. at a rent of Rs. 2,250 per month. When the assessee came on transfer from Orissa to Delhi on 1-5-1973, he was provided by his employer the said flat free of rent. The assessee was, thus, in occupation of the flat for 11 months in the relevant accounting year ended on 31-3-1974. The assessee, however, declared its perquisite value at Rs. 9,375 only, at the rate of 12 per cent...