Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Reported in : (1998)229ITR82(Mum.)
1. This is an appeal by the assessee against the order of the CIT, Central-II, Bombay, passed under s. 263 of the IT Act, 1961 on 28th March, 1994, holding that the assessment as framed by the AO was erroneous insofar as it was prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue, on the following two grounds : (i) that the claim of the assessee for bad debts of Rs. 28,77,420 was allowed by the AO without proper scrutiny and without looking into the conditions prescribed under cl. (i) of sub-s. (2), of s. 36, of the IT Act, 1961; and (ii) the AO also completed the assessment without making enquiries about the source of funds for the amount of Rs. 8,35,000 given by the assessee to his wife, Smt. Harvinder Singh Kaur.2. It would be necessary to reproduce para 6 of the assessment order in this connection : "6. Assessee has claimed bad debt of Rs. 28,77,420 along with the details of the bad debt. It is stated that he sold the above goods to Shri Bhagwandas Aggarwal whose office is on Aaram Hotel, ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Reported in : (1995)52ITD39(Mum.)
1. This Full Bench reference is made by the Division Bench by their orders dated June 16, 1988. The 'E' Bench at Bombay before whom this appeal arose for hearing on June 1, 1988, felt that for reasons recorded in their referring order it is a fit and proper case to be heard by a Special Bench and, therefore, they have formulated the following question and it had referred to a Full Bench. The question referred to the Full Bench is : "Whether, value of certain flats in a building should or should not be included in the net wealth of the assessee for the assessment year 1980-81 for which the relevant valuation date is March 31, 1980 ?" 20. In the order of reference it is stated that in the income-tax appeals for the assessment years 1978-79 and 1979-80 (Income-tax Appeals Nos. 5961 and 5962/(Bom) of 1983) which represent the appeals of the assessee's brother, Shri P.M. Mistry, by an order dated February 16, 1988, the Tribunal followed the Bombay High Court decisions in the case of Amarch...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Reported in : (1993)46ITD31(Mum.)
..... assessee is only a director and not a permanent chairman of the company.21. there is no prohibition under the nepalese company law on investment made in india by any nepali company and this stands proved by page 309 of the assessee's paper book, which is again a certificate from the above-mentioned chartered accountant, n. krishnaswamy and co.22 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Reported in : (1991)36ITD558(Mum.)
1. These appeals are directed against the order of the DC(A) for the assessment years 1984-85 and 1985-86.2. The first common ground is in regard to the disallowance of interest paid to M/s. P.R. Enterprises for both the years.3. The assessee is an individual. She derives income from house property, other sources and share of profit from two firms, viz., M/s.New Kampala Service Station and M/s. P.R. Enterprises. The assessee, in this case, took a loan from M/s. P.R. Enterprises, in which she is a partner. It was claimed before the ITO that the amount of loan taken from M/s. P.R. Enterprises had been invested in the firm of M/s. New Kampala Service Station where, too, she is a partner. She, accordingly, claimed deduction of interest paid to M/s. P.R. Enterprises as a deduction from the income. The ITO rejected the claim on the reasoning that there was no direct nexus between the loan taken from P.R.Enterprises and investment made by the assessee in M/s. New Kampala Service Station. Sim...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Reported in : (1988)26ITD108(Mum.)
1. The common grounds raised in these appeals challenge the valuations placed by the Commissioner (Appeals) on the assessees' shares of the properties situated at Versova, Mogra, Amboli, Andheri, Bandivali and Juhu. In general terms, the assessees' objections to the valuations adopted by the CWT(A) are four-fold and these may be summarized as under : (1) The CWT (Appeals) failed to appreciate the legal impact of the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1976 hitherto referred as ("ULC Act") on the values of the said properties. (2) The CWT(A) failed to appreciate and take into account the effect of the presence of cultivators and/or trespassers on the valuation of these properties. (3) The CWT(A) erred in adopting the rate of 61/2 per cent for capitalising the net rental income from these properties. (4) With reference to the property situated at Juhu village, the CWT (A) erred in seeking to include the reversionary value of the land up to the year 1994 and beyond. Since these pr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Reported in : (1987)22ITD532(Mum.)
1. Since a common issue is involved in both these appeals relating to two brothers, they are dealt with and disposed of by a consolidated order. The assessment year in both the cases is 1980-81 and the accounting period is financial year ended 31-3-1980.2. The facts in this case as gathered from the assessee's counsel as well as the records of the case may be briefly stated. Shri H.N.J. Dady and Shri K.N.J. Dady are brothers. Both of them left India on 28-3-1978 for Nepal with their respective spouses and returned to India on 10-4-1980. For proving their absence from India during the period between 28-3-1978 and 10-4-1980, entries in their passports to establish their departure out of India on 28-3-1978 and arrival in India on 10-4-1978 were shown to the Income-tax Officer. Since the accounting year of the assessee was the financial year, a claim was made before the 1TO that the assessees were non-residents for the assessment years 1979-80 and 1980-81. This claim was made in support o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Reported in : (1985)14ITD35(Mum.)
1. This is the assessee's appeal preferred against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals). Though the assessee has raised as many as 22 grounds, in fact there are only three grounds as under: 2. That the assessee challenges the validity and legality of the assessment. 3. Disallowance of surtax liability and the expenses disallowed under Section 40A(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act').2. The assessee-company manufactures various tungsten carbide products such as tips, dyes, nibs, drill steels, cutters, etc. The assessee-company follows previous year ending 31st December as accounting year.In the profit and loss account for the year under consideration, note 18 is relevant in which it was mentioned that last in first out method (LIFO) was adopted for computing direct cost and that on the basis of method which was used in the earlier years the cost as on 31-12-1975 was Rs. 48,659,804.It was the assessee's contention that because of the rising prices the assessee found it proper t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Reported in : (1983)4ITD409(Mum.)
1. The first appeal is by the assessee and the second appeal by the department.2. On 11-12-1931 was born in the village of Kuchwara, Madhya Pradesh, Rajneesh Chandra Mohan, who afterwards became Acharya Rajneesh. After obtaining his M.A. Degree, Chandra Mohan taught at the Raipur Sanskrit College from 1957 to 1959 and was a Professor of Philosophy at the University of Jabalpur between 1960-1966. He resigned his professorship in 1966 allegedly to devote himself to spiritual work. He is stated to have travelled extensively delivering lectures between the years 1958 and 1969, until he settled in Bombay in 1969. He is stated to have held a meditation camp for the first time in 1964 in Rajasthan. After 1969, many public lectures and appearances were ascribed to him. He also had written profusely on spiritual and allied subjects.3. By an indenture of trust dated 11-6-1969, Shri Himatlal Haribhai Joshi and Shri Ishwarlal Naranji Shah as settlors drew up a trust deed creating the trust known ...
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 Mumbai
Reported in : (1998)66ITD420(Mum.)
1. These cross appeals are directed against the order of the CIT(Appeals) dated 28-11 -1989 for the assessment year 1984-85. We may mention that these appeals were decided earlier, but the order of the Tribunal was recalled vide order dated 9-1-1997 in M.A. No. 139/Mum/96.The grounds taken by the assessee in its appeal read as under :- 1. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in law and on facts in not accepting the assessee's contention that the amount of Rs. 99,97,462 received by way of fees for supervision of construction and erection in terms of the Agreement dated 15-2-1981 with RCF Ltd. was in the nature of fees for technical services and was not management charges and, hence, was not liable to Indian income-tax under the IT. Act, 1961, read with the relevant provisions of the Agreement for the Avoidance of Double Taxation of Income between India and Denmark. 2. Without prejudice to the above ground of appeal, the learned CIT (Appeals) erred in law and on facts ...
Tag this Judgment!