Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Reported in : (1985)13ITD762(Delhi)
1. In this revenue appeal, the solitary ground is against the cancellation of penalty of Rs. 2,550 levied by the ITO under Section 271(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') in respect of the assessment year 1977-78.2. The respondent filed its return of income on 7-10-1977, though in normal course, it should have been filed on or before 30-6-1977. In the penalty proceeding initiated for late riling, it was explained that the asses-see was a registered firm and that its finally assessed income amounted to Rs. 1,63,840, on which in the status of registered firm, the tax worked out to Rs. 27,583, against which tax deducted at source under Section 194C of the Act was to the tune of Rs. 54,598 and, therefore, there could be no question of levying any penalty which could be in relation to tax levied on assessment. The assessee further pleaded that no extension application was filed, being under the bonafide belief that the tax deducted at source was much more than the tax due. The IT...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Allahabad
Reported in : (1991)37ITD285(All.)
1.It is an appeal filed by the assessee against an order of the learned CIT(A) dated 30th March, 1990 for the assessment year 1988-89. The following grounds have been taken up :- 1. The learned CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on facts in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer resulting in short allowance of deductions under Section 32 AB and 80-1 by holding that "Zarda Yukt Pan Masala" is a tobacco preparation within the meaning of item No. 2 in the Eleventh Schedule and hence not entitled to the said deduction despite there being relevant and cogent evidence on record to the contrary leading to the inevitable conclusion that "Zarda Yukt Pan Masala" is not a "tobacco preparation 2. That the learned CIT(A) completely disregarded the rule of interpretation while construing the meaning of item No. 2 in the said Schedule that entries pertinent to articles or things of every day use which have no statutory definition but are referred to, in any particular statute, have to be con...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Reported in : (1995)52ITD239(Kol.)
1. These two appeals filed by the assessee relate to the assessment years 1985-86 and 1986-87 and they are directed against the common order dated 26-3-1991 passed by the D.C. (Appeals).2. The assessee is an individual. The accounting years relevant to the assessment years under appeal ended on 31-3-1985 and 31-3-1986 respectively. The assessee carries on the business of film distribution under the name and style of M/s. Amar Jyoti Pictures. On 4th August, 1984 the assessee entered into an agreement with M/s. Guru Dutt Film Pvt. Ltd. Under the aforesaid agreement the assessee was appointed distributors of film 'Bindiya Chamkegi'. There are various conditions relating to the appointment of the assessee as distributors, but they are not very relevant for the purpose of the present appeal. Since the distributorship agreement entailed a large financial out-lay, the assessee entered into two agreements, one dated 23-8-1984 with M/s.Usha Movies and the other dated 24-8-1984 with M/s. Amar J...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Reported in : (2002)81ITD160(Delhi)
1. The appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the CIT(A), dt 29th Dec., 1998, pertaining to asst. yr. 1994-95. The first ground of appeal relates to deduction under Section 80-O of the Act.2. The assessee-company provides professional services in the field of medicines. It is headed by Dr. N.P.S. Chawla and Dr. (Miss) Devjit Kinberlay Chawla, as directors. The assessee-company got the necessary expertise in the matter of providing emergency medical assistance to any person anywhere in India on call. It has on its own panel several qualified doctors who always remain on call, provide necessary medical services wherever required and give professional information to foreign insurers. It is patronised by almost all the insurance companies in the world and some important select embassies of foreign countries, though no formal agreement exist in some of the cases. After providing required treatment they are also provided qualified doctor to escort them back to their dest...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Reported in : (2005)93ITD30(Delhi)
1. The main issue arising in this appeal relates to the claim of assessee Under Section 80HHC of Income-tax Act, 1961 (Act). Briefly stated, the facts are that assessee is an artist who declared income from sale of her paintings made locally as well as by way of export.Local sale and export sale were shown at Rs. 89,800/- and Rs. 2,43,038/- respectively. The total income from sale of painting was shown at Rs. 1,89,969/- out of which deduction of Rs. 1,38,051/- was claimed Under Section 80HHC of the Act. Since the assessee could not furnish any evidence regarding custom clearance, she was asked to show cause as to why her claim Under Section 80HHC be not rejected. In response to the same, the reply of assessee was as under: a) The assessee had sold paintings by displaying them in exhibition at Amsterdam, Netherlands. This sale qualifies for deduction Under Section 80HHC since Section 80HHC(2)(b) excludes export of only mineral oils and mineral and ores. The items exported by the assess...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Reported in : (2008)117TTJ(Mum.)353
1. This appeal is filed by the assessee and directed against the order of CIT(A)-XVII, Mumbai dt. 8th Dec., 2004 for asst. yr. 2001-02.2. We have heard both the sides and have also perused the materials placed on record and applicable legal position.3. In this appeal, the assessee is aggrieved by the decision of learned CIT(A) in confirming the gifts of Rs. 1,22,70,795 received by the assessee on his 80th birthday as his income from business and profession.4. Ground No. 2 is argumentative in nature in support of ground No. 1, hence, no specific decision thereon would be given as the same would be dealt with ground No. 1.5. The facts, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual who filed return of income showing income from other sources. As borne out from the assessment order, it is noted that assessee is a well known social reformer and philosopher and lacs of followers are spread all over the world. The AO from the note enclosed with the computation of income chart (found) that...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Reported in : (1982)1ITD988(Mum.)
1. The only issue raised in this appeal preferred by the assessee, Travel Agents Association of India, Bombay, for the assessment year 1978-79, for which the relevant previous year ended 31-12-1977, pertains to disallowance of Rs. 45,000, out of sum of Rs. 50,000 paid by the assessee to Pacific Area Travels Association (India), being the assessee's share of contribution towards "Food Festival" held at the time of conference. The Commissioner (Appeals) considered the disallowance of Rs. 45,000 under Section 37(2) as entertainment.2. The learned authorised representative for the assessee in detail submitted that the Travel Agents Association of India had incurred the said expenditure in fulfilment of its objects as detailed in the memorandum of association. He submitted at length that at the time of the conference of Pacific Area Travels Association (India) Chapter, more popularly known at PATA, a sum of Rs. 1,30,000 was spent on Food Festival in which about 2,000 people were hosted out...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT
Reported in : (1984)10ITD193(Bang.)
1. The appeal is by the revenue, The ITO made an assessment on Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. (HAL) for the assessment year 1978-79 as agents of Dunlop Ltd. By an order under Section 163 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), passed on 10-3-1981, the ITO held HAL were to be treated as agents of Dunlop Ltd., England. During the course of the proceedings under Section 163, HAL challenged the ITO's right to appoint them as agents of Dunlop Ltd. They urged that the payments made by them towards technical assistance fees and royalty were exempt from tax and do not come under the purview of the provisions of Section 9 of the Act. The ITO held that it was sufficient if the non-resident had received some income from or through the Indian company in order to attract the provisions of Section 163 and so long as this fact was not in dispute HAL cannot escape its liability to be treated as an agent of the non-resident. He also held that the question regarding the liability of the non-resident to be...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Hyderabad
Reported in : (1994)48ITD583(Hyd.)
1. These two appeals, the first one being an appeal by the Revenue for assessment year 1983-84 and the other by the assessee for assessment year 1984-85, are against the orders of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and as they involve common points they are being disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience.2. The sole dispute in these appeals is as to whether the assessee is entitled to exemption under Section 10(22) of the Income-tax Act, 4961.The assessee is an educational society registered under the A.P.(Telengana Area) Societies Act, 1989 on 4-9-1980. The society has no other activity except running of Matari Venkata Subba Rao Engineering College. It was started in September 1981 and continues its affiliation with Osmania University since inception. The College has Civil Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, Computer Science, Electronics and Communication Engineering Branches with 290 annual intake of students - 250 for 4 years Degree Course and 40 for three...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT
Reported in : (2003)87ITD630(Bang.)
1. This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - X, Hubli dated 31-3-1997, pertaining to assessment year 1995-96.2. The assessee though has raised as many as 17 grounds, yet the relevant controversy is challenged by way of raising following grounds: i. The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 1107.36 lakhs without allowing any expenditure incurred by the appellant in earning such income and thereby erred in not computing the total income as per the provisions of the IT Act, 1961. ii. The authorities below erred in computing the entire receipts under the head 'income from other sources' and further erred in not allowing the expenditure incurred by the appellant. iii. The authorities below erred in not computing the receipts under the head 'income from business or profession'. iv. The authorities below ought to have allowed the expenditure in the form of payment of interest to banks and on debenture and other expendit...
Tag this Judgment!