Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chandigarh
Reported in : (2007)112TTJ(Chd.)94
1. We find it convenient to dispose of the above four appeals by a consolidated order since they relate to the same assessee and involve certain common issues.2. ITA No. 379/Chd/2004 is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the CIT(A) dt. 27th Feb., 2004 pertaining to the asst. yr.1998-99. In this appeal the, assessee has preferred four grounds of appeal which we shall deal in seriatim. The brief background is that the appellant is a company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 and is, inter alia, engaged in the manufacture and sale of food and health care products. For the assessment year under consideration, the appellant filed its return of income declaring income of Rs. 91,84,98,160, against which assessment was completed at an income of Rs. 1,05,53,211 (sic) after making various additions/disallowances to the returned income, which have been partly deleted by the CIT(A), against which the assessee is presently in appeal before us.3. The ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Reported in : (2008)113TTJ(Delhi)178
1. These cross appeals, arising out of the order of the learned CIT(Appeals) dated 15.11.2006 for A.Y. 2003-04 are being decided by a common order for the sake of convenience.2. Dr. Rakesh Gupta Advocate, along with Shri Ashwani Taneja FCA and Shri Tarun Kumar Advocate, appeared for the assessee whereas Shri B.Koteshwara Rao Sr. DR represented the revenue. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in: 1 deleting the addition of Rs. 2,00,000/- made on account of claim of gift from Shri Pankaj Jain by the assessee which was not found genuine by the AO. 2 deleting the addition of Rs. 40,68,450/- and Rs. 22,03,850/-made on account of claim of gift of property from Shri Ashok Jain & Veena Jain respectively which were not found genuine by the AO.4. Before adjudicating these grounds, we consider it proper to narrate the factual background and the orders passed by the departmental authorities in relation to the main issues involved. The facts of the matter...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Madras
Reported in : (1983)3ITD221(Mad.)
1. These six appeals relating to the assessee, Shri S.P. Jayakumar, involving identical facts and dispute for our consideration are conveniently disposed of by this consolidated common order.2. The appeals are by the department and relate to the levy of penalty under Section 18(1)(a) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 ('the Act'), for the assessment years 1970-71 to 1975-76, for the assessee's default in filing the returns of net wealth within the prescribed time. The wealth-tax returns for all these years were filed by the assessee on 27-1-1976 voluntarily, in the sense that before any notice was issued to him to submit the returns. In response to the notice issued by the WTO under Section 18(2) proposing levy of penalty, the assessee submitted that he was not aware of the provisions of the Act and Rules and it is only when the Government of India publicised the Voluntary Disclosure Scheme ('VDS') that he consulted his tax practitioner and it is on his advice, that he filed the returns. The...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Reported in : (1985)13ITD288(Kol.)
1. The assessee in this case was an individual deriving income from salary, interest on security, house property, dividend, etc. During the relevant assessment, a sum of Rs. 10,80,000 was included as the assessee's income from undisclosed sources being the amount which was invested by the assessee benami in the name of Shri Kalyan J.B. Rana for the purchase of shares of Rohtas Industries Ltd. and S.K.G. Sugar Ltd., the two companies of the Sahu Jain Group. Since the sources of the purchase could not be explained, it was held that the amount had been invested by the assessee benami in the name of Shri Rana and this view was ultimately upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.The ITO, therefore, initiated penalty proceedings for concealment of this income under Section 28(1)(c) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 ('the Act,). In response to the show-cause notice, one of the legal representative of the assessee who had died, contended that the question of assessment of the said amount was stil...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad
Reported in : (1989)30ITD23(Ahd.)
Per Shri K. R. Dixit, Judicial Member - The central issue in this appeal is in respect of the claim to exemption as a public charitable trust made by the Sarabhai Foundation, the appellant before us. The question are : 2. If so, whether it is entitled to exemption under section 11 in respect of its income."Whether the grant of exemption is forfeited on the ground that the property or income of the Trust have been used for the benefit of the trustees or any concerns in which they have a substantial interest by application of sub-sections (1) (c) and (3) of section 13." 2. There are no less than 83 grounds of appeal but they all converge on the above points.3. Briefly stated, the facts which have given rise to these questions are that the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner (IAC) disallowed the claim of exemption under sec. 11 in respect of all the items on the ground that the income was not set for charitable purpose and that the income was not spent for charitable purpose and that the T...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Hyderabad
Reported in : (1993)1ITD45(Hyd.)
1. These appeals have been set down for hearing by a Special Bench as they involve a common question of law of general importance relating to the construction of Section 115J of the Income-tax Act, 1961.2. The facts relating to Messrs. Surana Steels (P.) Ltd. (I. T. A. No.1845/ (Hyd.) of 1990) are as follows. The assessee is a private limited company. For the assessment year 1988-89, corresponding to the previous year ending on October 22, 1987, the net profit according to the profit and loss account was Rs. 27,67,443. The Assessing Officer, by assessment order dated April 7, 1989, read with the rectification order dated September 20, 1989, deducted unabsorbed depreciation of Rs. 10,63,855 (made up of Rs. 10,10,304 for the assessment year 1986-87 and Rs. 53,551 for the assessment year 1987-88) and determined the book profits at Rs. 17,03,588 in order to apply the provisions of Section 115J. Thirty per cent. of this amount came to Rs. 5,11,076 which was determined as the taxable income...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Hyderabad
Reported in : (1993)46TTJ(Hyd.)458
These appeals have been set down for hearing by a Special Bench as they involve a common question of law of general importance relating to the construction of S. 115J of the IT Act, 1961.2. The facts relating to M/s. Surana Steels (P) Ltd. (ITA No.1845/Hyd/90) are as follows. The assessee is a Pvt. Ltd. Co. For the asst. yr. 1988-89, corresponding to the previous year ended 22nd Oct., 1987, the net profit according to the Profit & Loss account was Rs. 27,67,443. The Assessing Officer by assessment order dt. 7th April, 1989 read with the rectification order dt. 20th Sept., 1989 deducted unabsorbed depreciation of Rs. 10,63,855 (made up of Rs. 10,10,304 for asst. yr. 1986-87 and Rs. 53,551 for asst. yr. 1987-88) and determined the book profits at Rs. 17,03,588 in order to apply the provisions of S. 115J. Thirty per cent of this amount came to Rs. 5,11,076 which was determined as the taxable income since it was higher than Rs. 4,26,714 being the income computed under the other provis...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
1. As all these appeals concern the same group of the assessee, involve penalties imposed under ss. 271(1)(c), 273(c), 273(a) and 273(2)(a), they are being disposed off by this common order for the sake of convenience.2. The assessment in this case has a chequered history. The assessee is a registered firm and in the books of accounts, following cash credits appear in the books of Jalan HUF Amanat Account/Lohia Agricultural account.Asst. yr. P. Y. (Samvat year) Total cash credit appearing in Jalan------------------------------------------------------------------------1976-77 2031 25.491977-78 2032 219.001978-79 2033 213.001979-80 2034 36.001980-81 2035 15.001981-82 2036 25.00 3. For asst. yr. 1976-77 the return of income was filed on 22nd January, 1977, and the assessments for asst. yrs. 1976-77 and 1977-78 were completed under s. 143(3) r/w s. 144B of the Act. The assessee failed in the first appeal. However, on the second appeal, the Tribunal restored the matter back to the file of ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
1. These two appeals filed both by the Revenue as well by the assessee are consolidated and disposed of by a single order. Appeals containing common issues relate to asst. yr. 1989-90.2. At the outset it may be pointed out that none appeared on behalf of the assessee despite notice having been sent through registered post.On perusal of the order sheet we further find that the appeals have been fixed right from the year 1996 onwards. Considering the several opportunities allowed, we proceed to dispose of appeals ex parts qua assessee but on merits. The submissions of the learned Departmental Representative and the paper book submitted by the assessee are taken into consideration while disposing of the appeals.3. Taking up the Revenue's appeal in ITA No. 599/Del/1992 first, we find that the first contention raised relates to disallowance of loss of Rs. 30,000 claimed by the assessee. The facts in brief are that the assessee-company who is having its factory at Okhla Industrial Area Phas...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Reported in : (2002)81ITD299(Mum.)
1. This is an application for stay of the outstanding demand of Rs. 43,65,82,270 relating to the asst. yr. 1997-98.2. The brief facts resulting in the filing of the stay application are these. The assessee is the Maharashtra State Electricity Board, established under the Electricity Supply Act, 1948. It is wholly owned by the Government of Maharashtra and its sole objective is to generate and supply electricity. In making the assessment, the AO applied the provisions of Section 115JA of the IT Act, 1961, and computed the book profit for the purpose of income-tax at Rs. 460.88 crores and took 30 per cent thereof as income for assessment purposes, which came to Rs. 138.26 crores. On appeal, the assessment was confirmed. The tax demand was raised accordingly, out of which after giving credit for the payments made by the assessee, a sum of Rs. 43,65,82,270 is outstanding as of now in respect of which the stay is prayed for.3. The assessee's appeal before the Tribunal against the assessmen...
Tag this Judgment!