Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Reported in : (1994)49ITD219(Delhi)
1. The various assessees who are partners in a firm M/s Nand Lal Cold Storage & General Mills have filed these appeals for the various assessment years and the Department have also filed cross appeals for the various assessment years against each of those assessees and the common issue that is involved in these appeals is related to the value that is to be adopted in regard to land & building housing and the cold storage of the firm. Therefore, these appeals have been grouped together and are being disposed of by this composite order.2. Shri K.C. Srivastava appearing for the various assessees submitted that the approved valuer's report was obtained for the valuation dates relevant for assessment years 1980, 1981, 1982 and 1983 respectively.The approved valuer has noted that the cold storage has no open land and that if the properties were to be demolished then the Moradabad Development Authority had placed restrictions on the sale of the land.He had also observed that the prop...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Patna
Reported in : (1995)52ITD1(Pat.)
1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee. The main dispute relates to the order of the CIT(A) confirming disallowance of unpaid sales tax of Rs. 54,319 under Section 43B of the Income-tax Act, 1961.2. The facts, in brief, are that Bihar sales-tax amounting to Rs. 47,159 and Central sales-tax amounting to Rs. 7,260 remained unpaid on the last date of the previous year, i.e., 31-12-1985. Total amounts to Rs. 54,319. The due date for filing the return of income under Section 139(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was 30-6-1986 and it is an admitted position that the above outstanding amounts were paid after 30-6-1986.The assessee is, therefore, not saved by the first proviso below Section 43B of the Act, even if the first proviso is treated as clarificatory and operative from 1-4-1984, as held by the Patna High Court in the case of Jamshedpur Motor Accessories Stores v. Union of India [1991] 189 ITR 70. The amount was accordingly disallowed by the Assessing Officer and the disallowance was...
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 Hyderabad
Reported in : (1995)54ITD38(Hyd.)
1. These four appeals are by the assessee against the orders of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). The common controversy in these appeals is whether during asst. years 1991-92 to 1994-95, the assessee failed to deduct tax at source under sec. 195 of the I.T. Act from the payments made to the non-resident and make payment thereof to the credit of Government of India. For the sake of convenience, all these appeals are disposed of by this common order.2. The Assessing Officer held that the assessee made the payment to the non-resident within the meaning of sec. 195 and was liable to deduct tax at source therefrom and that failure to do so made the assessee liable to deposit the amount to the credit of Govt. of India and pay interest for such failure under Section 201 (1A) of the I.T. Act.Section 195 of the I.T. Act, 1961, reads as under : 195. (1) Any person responsible for paying to a non-resident, not being a company, or to a foreign company, any interest (not being interest on...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
1. These are three appeals by the assessee against common order of the CIT(A)-XII, New Delhi pertaining to asst. yrs. 1993-94, 1994-95 and 1995-96.2. Since the issues involved in all these appeals are common, and the issues have been disposed of by the CIT(A) by a consolidated order, therefore, for the sake of convenience, these appeals are also disposed of by this common order.3. The assessee has raised 14 grounds challenging validity of the reopening of assessments under s. 148 of the IT Act, 1961, for these three years and also the view of the CIT(A) that the sales transaction made to his HUF, is sham transaction and thereby confirming the recasting of the P&L a/c and determining the total income at Rs. 12,92,080, Rs. 13,52,290 and Rs. 29,64,200 for the asst. yrs. 1993-94, 1994-95 and 1995-96 vide assessment order dt. 29th March, 1996, instead of income declared and accepted by intimation under s. 143(1)(a) at Rs. 5,52,80, Rs. 2,34,290 and Rs. 2,30,950 for the asst. yrs. 1993-9...
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 Madras
Reported in : (2004)88ITD185(Chennai)
1. This is an appeal preferred by the assessee Shri R.K. Swamy of Chennai - 600 018 for the assessment year 1997-98 against the appellate order dated 7-3-2002 of the Commissioner (Appeals)-V, Chennai. The grounds of appeal of the assessee read as under :- 1. The order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) is opposed to law, weight of evidence and facts of the case. 2. The learned CIT(A) erred in directing that the non-compete fee of Rs. 3.20 crores received by the appellant be brought to tax as business income under Section 28(u)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 without appreciating: (a) the fact that the sum received was a capital receipt not subject to tax; (b) the various binding decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court that were relied upon by the appellant in this regard; (c) the incontrovertible facts surrounding the appellant's case [The CIT(A) has, in fact, misconstrued and misunderstood the same] and (d) the circumstances leading to and necessitating payment of the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Indore
Reported in : (2004)91ITD603Indore
"1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 502222/- that was made by the AO on account of disallowance of interest as such disallowance was upheld by the ld. CIT(A) in the AY 1992-93. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 21000/- that was made by the AO on account of notional interest on the amount of Rs. 2 lac advanced for non-business purposes. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 2252413/- that was made by the AO on account of power subsidy treating it as revenue receipts, whereas the ld. CIT(A) has held it as capital receipts. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 132975/- that was made by the AO on account of expenses incurred for installation of machinery (which is a fact admitted by the assessee itself) treati...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Reported in : (2005)93ITD520(Delhi)
1. The main issue arising in this appeal relates to the applicability of the provisions of Section 44BB of Income-tax Act, 1961 (Act).2. Briefly stated the facts are these: The assessee is a foreign company having its head office in USA. During the financial year 1995-96, it had received a contract from Gas Authority of India Ltd. (GAIL) for laying of pipelines through horizontal directional drilling across the Chambal and the Yamuna river. The total contractual receipts in the year under consideration amounted to Rs. 12,98,22,970/-. By invoking the provisions of Section 44BB, the assessee offered the net income at Rs. 1,29,82,297/- by applying the presumptive rate of 10% of the total receipts. The assessee was asked to explain as to how the provisions of Section 44BB were applicable to the present case. The explanation of the assessee before the AO was (i) that the pipelines laid by the assessee was to be used for the purpose of transportation of natural gas which falls within the me...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Reported in : (2005)3SOT227(Mum.)
The only issue arising in this appeal relates to the addition of Rs. 8,10,000 made by the assessing officer on account of unexplained investment in excess stock.Briefly stated the facts are, that the assessee was the Proprietor of M/s. Quality Wire Products, manufacturing wire mesh and poultry equipments. A survey action was carried out at the business premises of the assessee on 4-12-1996 in the course of which, the stock inventory was prepared. The Closing Stock as per the Trading Account was worked out to Rs. 14,42,082 while the stock as per the inventory prepared amounted to Rs. 22,45,941. Thus, according to the survey party, there was excess stock of Rs. 8,03,859. The statement of the assessee was recorded on oath on the same date in which the assessee expressed his inability to explain the discrepancies found in the stock. Accordingly, the assessee offered the amount of Rs. 8,10,000 for the purpose of taxation. However, in the return of income filed on 31-10-1997 for the year un...
Tag this Judgment!