Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents act 1970 39 of 1970 section 137 multiple priorities Court: income tax appellate tribunal itat mumbai Page 1 of about 58 results (0.169 seconds)

Smt. Rajrani Gupta Vs. Deputy Commissioner of

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2000)72ITD155(Mum.)

1. The appellant, Smt. Rajrani Gupta, runs a sex and health clinic named "M/s Kayakalp International" and a beauty clinic named "Monalisa". Her husband, Dr. Sohanlal Gupta, is a dental surgeon. Her son, Dr. Arunkumar Gupta, is also a qualified doctor, being a Bachelor of Ayurvedic Medicines & Surgery (B.A.M.S.). Her daughter-in-law, Dr.Renu Gupta, is also a qualified doctor and has the same qualifications as that of her husband, Dr. Arunkumar Gupta. There is another entity called "Dr. Sohanlal Gupta (HUF)" in which all the abovementioned persons are members. The entire family was residing at Bathinda, Punjab, upto mid-July 1991. Because of the terrorist activity in the State of Punjab, they moved to Bombay in 1991, where the appellant has been running the aforesaid sex and health and beauty clinics. Her family members have also been working with her as salaried employees.She has set up three branches of her sex and health clinic in Mumbai.The first one was set up at Borivali in 19...

Dy. Cit Vs. Sarabhai Piramal

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. This appeal is preferred on behalf of the revenue against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) on various grounds. The assessee has filed the cross objection assailing the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) on certain grounds. Since the appeal and the cross objection were heard together, these are being disposed of by this consolidated order. We, however, prefer to adjudicate them one by one.2. Through this appeal, the revenue has assailed the order of Commissioner (Appeals) on following grounds: On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in: (1) directing the assessing officer to give deduction of Rs. 2,83,33,333 under Section 35AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961, without appreciating the fact that the assessee itself is basically a trader and does not have any manufacturing facility/activity and also without appreciating the fact that the liabilities of excise, Modvat, sales tax etc., in respect of the production, cl...

Amitabh Bachchan Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2005)97TTJ(Mum.)516

1. This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of CIT(A), Central-VII, Mumbai, dt. 30th July, 2004 for the asst. yr.2001-02. "(I) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) erred in holding that the entire amount of Rs. 23 crores from M/s EEL was taxable as appellant's income for asst. yr. 2001-02, without appreciating that-- (a) the appellant was bound under agreements dt. 10th Jan., 1995 and 11th Feb., 1995 between him and M/s ABCL to handover to M/s ABCL entire income from 'engagements' as defined in the said agreements except those under Clause 1.7 thereof and M/s ABCL could enforce the terms thereunder as per Clauses 11 and 20 thereof. Further, he was also legally bound by his assurance given in information memorandum of M/s ABCL issued in 1996 for placing shares thereof at a premium of Rs. 70 per share. (b) the said agreements were genuine and bona fide as found by Hon'ble Tribunal vide its order No. 4453/Mum/2000 for asst. yr. 1996-97...

Jaya S. Shetty Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in : (1999)69ITD336(Mum.)

1. Appellant is an individual. Search operations under s. 132(1) of the IT Act were commenced in his case at various places on 30th October, 1995, and continued upto 20th December, 1995. The assessee filed a return of "undisclosed income" under s. 158BC at Rs. 31,96,963 on 23rd September, 1996. The AO completed the assessment on 31st December, 1996 on a total "undisclosed income" at Rs. 4,52,27,690 and determined the tax payable at Rs. 2,71,36,614. Aggrieved by this order of the AO, the assessee has come in appeal to the Tribunal. The assessee has taken three additional grounds before us. Of these additional grounds, the first one is challenging the legality of the assessment, claiming the order to the time-barred and invalid. Ground Nos. 2 and 3 are stated to be clarificatory in respect of original ground Nos. 16 and 31. Being legally permissible, the learned Departmental Representative had no objection to the admission of the additional grounds of appeal and hence, we proceed to dec...

National Health and Education Vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in : (1999)70ITD330(Mum.)

1. A group of migrants, in the aftermath of partition, led by Mr.Parmanand Deepchand Hinduja came and settled in Bombay. They felt the need for medical care. These persons banded together and on account of their efforts, a small outdoor clinic was opened in December, 1951. In February, 1953, the clinic was converted into an indoor hospital with 30 beds which was progressively increased to 70. In 1954, the persons who started the clinic in a small way, formed a society which was named the "National Health and Education Society". It was registered under the Societies Registration Act on 13th April, 1954. In 1963 a new 100 bed hospital was commissioned in the same plot of land. Gradually this 100 bed hospital increased its activities and in 1972 ventured into medical research. The research institution also came to be recognised by the Government of India. The name of the hospital, after the advent of the research centre, was changed from National Hospital to "P.D.Hinduja National Hospita...

Petroleum India International Vs. Deputy Commissioner of

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2000)241ITR43(Mum.)

1. The appeal of the assessee, for asst. yr. 1992-93, had come up for hearing before 'A' Bench, Mumbai and on the recommendation of the Bench, the President constituted a Special Bench for deciding the appeal. The issue involved is : "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the first Appellate Authority was justified in upholding the order of the AO disallowing deduction under s. 80-O of the IT Act, 1961, with reference to gross convertible foreign exchange received by the assessee by way of fees for technical and consultancy services rendered by it to the parties abroad ?" 2. The relevant facts, in this case, are that the appellant is an AOP and consists of nine public sector companies as its members. The appellant provides technical and consultancy services to various parties abroad. For asst. yr. 1992-93, for which the previous year ended on 31st March, 1992, the assessee had claimed deduction under s.80-O of the IT Act, 1961 of Rs. 3,38,38,386 being 50 per cent o...

Grasim Industries Ltd Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. This appeal by the assessee for the asst. yr. 1993-94 is directed against the order of the CIT(A) upholding certain additions and disallowances.2. The assessee is one of the biggest Indian companies in which public is interested. It is highly diversified and largest "core industries" in India. It produces viscose, staple fibre, rayon, pulp, caustic soda, cement, software, sponge iron, textiles, heavy engineering machinery and chemicals. It employs over 25,000 persons and its plants are located at about 10 places in India.3. In the memo of appeal, several grounds are raised, but during the course of hearing, the first objection taken by the learned counsel for the assessee related to disallowance of part of deduction claimed under s. 80M of the IT Act, 1961 out of dividend income. The assessee during the relevant period received dividends from Indian companies and returns from UTI amounting to Rs. 28.64 crores and distributed dividend approximately Rs. 25.11 crores. In its return of...

Medical Genetic Clinic and Vs. Income-tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the CIT (Appeals)-XVII, Bombay, dated 19-10-1995 for the assessment year 1989-90.2. The assessee is a firm consisting of two partners, Dr. Hema Purandare and Dr. Amit Chakravarty. During the year the firm purchased one computer machine called "Robotron Computer Aided Image Analyser".The Assessing Officer noted that the assessee was not engaged in business nor is it engaged in the activity of construction, manufacture or production of any one or more of the articles or things other than those specified in the list in the Eleventh Schedule to the Income-tax Act so as to be entitled for investment allowance on this machinery.She noted that the assessee is engaged in professional activity and are consultant medical geneticist and is offering services mainly for prenatal diagnosis of hereditary diseases/defects. The instrument to be purchased being an advance model of machinery would reduce the required manual labour to 15%. S...

Narang Overseas Pvt. Ltd. Vs. the Acit

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. The Hon'ble President, ITAT, vide order dated 7.8.2006 has constituted this Bench to adjudicate the following issue: Whether in the light of the decision in 232 ITR 2 it must be held that mesnc profit received by the assessee is revenue income chargeable to tax.as well as to dispose off the appeal of the assessee containing the following grounds: (1) The learned Commissioner of Income Tax. (Appeals (CIT(A)[ erred in holding that the mesnc profit of Rs. 34,57,01,137/- received by the Appellant pursuant to the consent decree dated 08.01.2002 constitutes revenue receipt assessable to tax and consequently, in confirming the AO's order bringing the same to tax.P. Mariappa Gounder v. CIT and DCIT Exhibitors Pvt. Ltd. (2005) 1 SOT 918 (Del) mesne profits constitute taxable revenue receipts. (3) He further erred in this connection in holding that paragraphs 28 to 31 of the Tribunal's order dated 16.12.2004 pertaining to block assessment were not the operative parts of the Tribunal's order ...

Premier Automobiles Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2003)84ITD169(Mum.)

1. This appeal pertains to the asst. yr. 1995-96. Though six grounds were urged by the assessee-company, at the time of hearing, ground No.2 is not pressed by the learned counsel. Therefore ground No, 2 is dismissed.2. Vide ground No. 6 assessee-company contends that the tax authorities have erred in taxing an amount of Rs. 53,06,632 twice as income. This issue was considered by the learned CIT(A) in paras 114 to 119 of his order. Learned counsel submitted before us that proper explanation was not given before AO but a reconciliation statement was furnished before learned CIT(A) and he should have considered this issue. Learned Departmental Representative has no objection if this matter is set aside to the file of the AO, Under the circumstances of the case we set aside the issue to the file of the AO to re-examine the matter in the light of the reconciliation statement. "The IT authorities have erred in law and on the facts of the case in taxing Rs. 46,78,000 under Section 41(1) of t...