Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad
Reported in : (1986)17ITD691(Ahd.)
Per Shri K. R. Dixit, Judicial Member - Both the above appeals arise out of the order of the Commissioner passed in exercise of his revisional powers under section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act). The ITO had not added the interest on certain loans advanced by the assessee, to the income of the assessee on accrual basis. The Commissioner was of the view that this omission by the ITO was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue and, therefore, directed him to calculate the interest, if any, on the loans on accrual basis and add the same to the total income of the assessee.The particulars of these loans are as follows : Shortly stated, the assessees case was that there was not much hope of recovery of these loans, therefore, the interest on it should not be added to the assessees income on accrual basis. The Commissisoner has considered the relevant details regarding these loans which showed the chances of recovery. According to him it could not be said that th...
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 Ahmedabad
Reported in : (1993)46TTJ(Ahd.)136
This is an appeal by the Revenue which arises out of the order of the CIT(A)-IV, Ahmedabad dt. 20th Dec., 1988. Several grounds of appeal have been raised by the Revenue disputing the decision of the CIT(A) to urge that the CIT(A) erred in his decision and therefore, his order should be set aside and that of the ITO should be restored.2. The assessee is an individual. The assessment year involved is 1985-86 for which the accounting period ended on 30th June, 1984. The assessee filed return on 21st May, 1986 admitting total income of Rs. 30,590 but the ITO determined the total income at Rs. 4,00,165 after making several additions and disallowances.3. The first issue involved relates to loss of Rs. 27,279 in the business of M/s. Gujarat Parquet Flooring & Furnishing Centre. The ITO rejected the claim of loss in the aforesaid business on the ground that the assessee had not produced any books in support of the loss sustained. From the information furnished, he concluded that no prosp...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad
Reported in : (1992)43ITD691(Ahd.)
1. There are a number of grounds in-this appeal but the ground regarding which arguments were made most extensively is an additional ground. It is an important ground. If it is decided in favour of the assessee it would not be necessary to decide the other grounds. That ground is that the order passed by the Income-tax Officer is barred by limitation. It arises in this way.2. The assessment order has been passed on 24-9-1984 under Section 143(3) read with Section 144B. The assessee had filed objections to the draft assessment order. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Central) had passed an order under Section 125A(1) conferring concurrent jurisdiction over this case on the IAC from 1-11-1978. The assessee's contention is that since this concurrent jurisdiction had been conferred, the provisions of section 144B would not be applicable by virtue of sub-Section (7) thereof so that the extension of limitation period available under Section 153, Explanation 1 (iv) was not available and that t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad
Reported in : (1993)46TTJ(Ahd.)1
There are a number of grounds in this appeal but the ground regarding which arguments were made most extensively is an additional ground. It is an important ground. If it is decided in favour of the assessee it would not be necessary to decide the other grounds. That ground is that the order passed by the ITO is barred by limitation. It arises in this way.2. The assessment order has been passed on 24th Sept., 1984 under S.143(3) r/w S. 144B. The assessee had filed objections to the draft assessment order. The CIT (Central) had passed an order under S.125A(1) conferring concurrent jurisdiction over this case on the IAC from 1st Nov., 1978. The assessees contention is that since this concurrent jurisdiction had been conferred the provisions of S. 144B would not be applicable by virtue of sub-s. (7) thereof so that the extension of limitation period available under S. 153, Expln. 1(iv) was not available and that therefore, the normal period of limitation was applicable. Since, the assess...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad
1. This appeal of the assessee is directed against order dt. 9th Dec., 1994 passed by CIT(A)-III, Ahmedabad, deciding the appeal of the assessee relating to asst. yr. 1990-91.2. The first ground of this appeal of the assessee relates to addition of Rs. 1,58,568 on account of being uncollected fees by the assessee company from the students, made by Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred to as the AO) and confirmed by the CIT(A) in the following facts and circumstances.3. The assessee, Noble Institute Private Ltd. is like many other coaching institutes being run in the Ahmedabad City and other towns for imparting coaching to students after their school times. The assessee company is running coaching classes for students of class X to XII for different subjects relating to Science, Mathematics etc. It appears from the record that the assessee was running as many as 5 branches in the previous year concerning to asst. yr. 1990-91 in which as stated by the learned counsel for assessee, the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad
Reported in : (1996)58ITD251(Ahd.)
Per Shri Phool Singh, Judicial Member - This appeal of the assessee is directed against order dated 9-12-1994 passed by CIT (A)-III, Ahmedabad, deciding the appeal of the assessee relating to assessment year 1990-91.2. The first ground of this appeal of the assessee related to addition of Rs. 1,58,568 on account of being uncollected fees by the assessee company from the students, made by Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred to as the Assessing Officer) and confirmed by the CIT (A) in the following facts and circumstances.3. The assessee, Noble Institute Private Ltd. is like many other coaching institutes being run in the Ahmedabad City and other towns for imparting coaching to students after their school times. The assessee company is running coaching classes for students of class X to XII for different subjects relating to Science, Mathematics etc. It appears from the record that the assessee was running as many as 5 branches in the previous year concerning to assessment year 1990...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad
Reported in : (1999)69ITD9(Ahd.)
1. These are two appeals preferred by the assessee relating to asst.yrs. 1982-83 and 1983-84 against the separate orders of the CIT(A) I, Baroda, dt. 19th February, 1990, for asst. yr. 1982-83 and 28th February, 1990, for asst. yr. 1983-84.2. While hearing these two appeals, the Division Bench, comprising of S/Shri B. M. Kothari and Jordan Kachchap, felt that in view of the conflicting decision in the matter of granting investment allowance, additional depreciation and extra shift allowance in cases where the actual cost of plant and machinery goes on increasing on account of fluctuation in foreign exchange rates vis-a-vis the Indian rupee value, especially when the plant and machinery were purchased from a foreign country in foreign currency on instalment basis and when the Indian party paying the instalments is obliged to pay the instalments in foreign currency to the foreign party, this is a fit case to be considered by a special Bench consisting of three Members of the Tribunal. B...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad
Reported in : (2004)83TTJ(Ahd.)904
1. All these concerns and persons belong to a group known as "N K Group". The proceedings of search were conducted in this case on 24th Feb., 1999. The main grounds raised in all these appeals involve consideration of common and connected points. Hence all these appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.2. We will first deal with the appeal in the case of N.K. Proteins Ltd. being IT(SS)A No. 15/Ahd/2002. The assessee has raised the following grounds in this appeal: 1. The learned CIT(A) has erred in rejecting the contention that block assessment is void ab initio since the notice issued under Section 158BC does not mention the status of the assessee and does not mention correct block period and therefore, the notice issued is invalid. 2.1 The learned CIT(A) has erred in holding that the purchases made from certain suppliers amounting to Rs. 4.76 crores, for asst. yr. 1998-99 and Rs. 7.23 crores for asst. yr. 1999-2000 amounting in all to Rs. 11.99 cror...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad
Reported in : (2004)88ITD228(Ahd.)
1. These appeals by the Revenue and cross objections by the assessees are against the orders of Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) both dated 27-9-1995 for the assessment year 1992-93. Since there is a common dispute, these appeals and cross objections are being disposed of by a common order for the sake of convenience.2. Two assessments have been made in the hands of Kachradas Patel Specific Family Trust and Nirma Specific Family Trust. Two sums of Rs. 20,29,503 and Rs. 34,34,527 respectively were received by these two trusts as a refund of custom duty. Two proprietary concerns M/s. Noble Industries and M/s. Navbharat Industries purchased certain goods through Gujarat Detergent Manufacturing Association (GDMA for short) and paid certain customs duty on those purchases. The amounts were claimed and allowed as deduction in the earlier years in the assessments of erstwhile trusts K. Kachradas Patel Specific Trust and Nirma Specific Family Trust. These trusts were dissolved on 20-12-19...
Tag this Judgment!