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
1. As there was difference of opinion between the Members constituting the Bench, the hon'ble President, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has nominated me to express my opinion on the following point of difference: Whether provisions of Section 67A of the I.T. Act, 1961 can be invoked for computing total income of the assessee, who is a company, is a member of association of persons or body of individual, wherein the shares of the members are determinate and known? 2. The facts relevant to the question mentioned above, arc in short compass. The assessee was a member of an Association of Persons (AOP) namely, India Auto Ancillary Trust (IAAT). The said AOP declared loss for the year under consideration and the share of loss in the hands of the assessee was computed at Rs. 12,89,911/- being 7.69% of the total loss since the stake of the assessee in the AOP was 7.69%. The assessee claimed the set off for the above share of loss against the income computed under other heads. Such claim was m...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Reported in : (1983)3ITD633(Mum.)
1. The Special Bench was constituted to consider the following important question which arises from the cross objection of the assessee: Whether the provisions of Section 144B which are introduced in the I.T. Act, 1961 with effect from 1-1-1976 are applicable to all pending assessment proceedings or whether they are applicable only to the proceedings for assessment years 1976-77 and onwards? The assessment year involved is 1974-75. The assessee, a firm, had filed their first return on 5-8-1974. In the course of the assessment proceedings, the ITO, after hearing the assessee, made out a draft assessment order and referred the same to the IAC under Section 144B on 29-3-1977. The assessee filed his objections on 12-4-1977. The IAC, after hearing the assessee, gave his directions which were received by the ITO on 23-9-1977. The assessment was completed later. The assessee's case is that the provisions of Section 144B, under which the ITO made the reference to the IAC, are not applicable s...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Reported in : (2006)102ITD1(Mum.)
2. The assessee is a Statutory Corporation set up under the Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation Ordinance, 1997 dated 12-3-1997, which was subsequently replaced by Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation Act, 1997 (Maharashtra Act No. XXVI of 1997) [for short 'VIDC Act'], which came into effect from 12-3-1997. Assessee being aggrieved by the orders of the revenue authorities, approached the Tribunal and vide its order dated 28th February, 2003, Tribunal allowed assessee's appeal partly.3. Before the Assessing Officer, assessee claimed the status as "Local Authority". It was rejected by the Assessing Officer. Assessee carried the matter before the CIT(A).4. Assessee's second plea that the assessee's income is exempted under Section 10(20A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was also rejected.5. The next objection of the assessee was against the order of the CIT(A) in holding that assessee-Corporation is not an instrumentality of the State and is not a State within the meaning of A...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Reported in : (1982)1ITD244(Mum.)
1. The appeal of the assesses and interveuers involves question of far-reaching importance vitally affecting particularly individual assessees engaged in profession who maintain their accounts on what is called "the cash system". The question has been referred to the Special Bench in view of conflict of views by different Benches of the Tribunal and also its considerable general importance to persons engaged in profession, either individually or in partnership with others. We have, therefore, had the benefit of hearing not only the counsel appearing for the particular assessee, but also hearing the counsels for interveners, representatives including professional bodies and associations like the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India and the Bombay Chartered Accountants' Society, who sought permission, and were allowed to intervene. Counsel for another assessee, Y. P. Trivedi in WT Appeal No. 197 (Bom.) of 1980, on somewhat different facts, was also heard as involving some identic...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Reported in : (1986)16ITD458(Mum.)
1. The revenue is aggrieved against the order of the Appellate Controller deleting goodwill of Rs. 4.50 lakhs.2. Shri M.G.R. Aitken died on 21-5-1970. He was seniormost partner of Crawford Bayley & Co., solicitors, Bombay, with share of 19 per cent.The accountable person included in the estate of the deceased only Rs. 60,933 on account of the deceased's interest in the aforesaid firm and claimed that nothing was includible on account of share of goodwill of the deceased in the said firm because in a firm of professionals, the dominant factors were personal skill, integrity, honesty and professional expertise. The Assistant Controller, however, held that the aforesaid firm of solicitors had been in existence for a number of years and the clientele was attracted by the firm's name and not because the said firm had a particular individual as a partner and it was doubtful if many clients knew the names of the partners of the said firm, not to mention the personal skill, integrity, etc...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Reported in : (1992)43ITD154(Mum.)
1. These are seven appeals, four by the assessee relating to the assessment years 1977-78, 1978-79, 1979-80 and 1980-81 and three by the Department relating to assessment years 1977-78, 1979-80 and 1980-81.All these appeals were heard together and are disposed of by a consolidated order. These are appeals against the orders of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) dated 24-6-1986 for the assessment years 1977-78 to 1980-81. The issue concerns the leviability of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act, which for the relevant years amounted to Rs. 3,42,000; Rs. 2,20,470; Rs. 2.16,000 and Rs. 2,32,000 respectively. In para 3 of his order, the CIT(A) has given details of returned income, assessed income, concealed income and the penalties levied for the 4 years. The facts leading to the levy of these penalties are briefly as follows.2. The assessee is a film artist. She had offered an amount of Rs. 25,00,000 for taxation under the Voluntary Disclosure Scheme in 1971.Thereafter, on 1...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Reported in : (1987)22ITD111(Mum.)
1. These six appeals relate to the assessment years 1968-69 to 1973-74 and arise out of the proceedings for imposition of penalty under Section 18(1)(c) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957. In the following table relevant dates of the original assessment orders, reassessment orders and the penalty orders are given :Assessment Date of Date of Date of Year original reassessment Penalty1968-69 21.1.1969 26.3.1979 31.3.19811969-70 8.10.1969 26.3.1979 31.3.19811970-71 18.1.1972 26.3.1979 31.3.19811971-72 18.1.1972 26.3.1979 31.3.19811972-73 19.1.1973 26.3.1979 31.3.19811973-74 31.10.1973 26.3.1979 31.3.1981 In the original assessment orders, the value of the flat at "El-Cid" Building at 13, Ridge Road, Bombay-6 including garage was taken at Rs. 1,39,000 for the first four assessment years and at Rs. 1,94,550 for the remaining two assessment years on the basis of the valuation made by the registered valuer. Subsequently, reassessment proceedings were initiated on 9.8.1974 under Section 17 of the We...
Tag this Judgment!