Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad
Reported in : (2005)97TTJ(Ahd.)818
1. Both these appeals by the assessee are against the order of the CIT(A), Baroda, dt. 14th Aug., 2003 and 22nd Feb., 2005, respectively.2. The grounds taken therein are quite argumentative, but at the time of hearing, the parties came to an agreement that the issues involved in these two appeals of the assessee are as under: (i) The first issue relates to the assessee's claim of deduction of an expenditure of Rs. 6 crores claimed to have been paid, as non-compete fees to M/s VBC Industries Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "VBC") and its founder member, Mr. M.V.V.S. Murthy, after having purchased VBC's plant for manufacturing nitric acid and ammonium nitrate situated at Ponnada Srikakulam District, Andhra Pradesh. (ii) The second issue relates to the consideration of delayed payment of employees' contribution to PF as not deductible under Section 36(1)(va) of the Act. (iii) The third issue relates to disallowance of assessee's claim of deduction of the amounts paid on account of emplo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad
Reported in : (2005)97ITD125(Ahd.)
..... to be added or deducted from the actual cost of the asset, as defined in section 43(1) of the act and, therefore, it cannot be allowed as a revenue expenditure.in the case of india cement ltd. (supra), their lordships of the supreme court considered the liabilities of stamp charges, registration fees and lawyers fees, etc. for obtaining the loans which were secured on fixed assets. the said loan was utilised ..... loans in terms of rupee and this increase in liability to repay these loans came to rs. 21,82,062 on 8th/9-3-1961. in the assessment for the assessment years 1970-71 and 1971-72 the assessee-companies claimed depreciation on account of increased liability for development as aforesaid on the sum of rs. 18,46,023. the said amount of rs. 18, ..... , pontoons, dredgers used and occupied by egl whether as a licensee or tenant or owner or otherwise, all plant and machinery, patents, trade-mark and designs, vehicles, etc.; the amount of advances (including loans and other debts whether secured or unsecured bills of exchange, advances recoverable in cash or in kind or for value to be received, e.g., rates, ..... 39,00,339 + 1,20,09,380) which was allowed for the first time in assessment year 1990-91 without restricting it to 2.6 per cent of the project cost. though the assessment order for the assessment year 1990-91 was rectified, but the consequential rectification for assessment year 1993-94 was not carried out which resulted in an enhanced allowance to the assessee of rs. 1,59,94,150 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad
Reported in : (2002)82ITD135(Ahd.)
1. These two appeals filed by the assessee relating to asst. yrs.1994-95 and 1995-96 involve common points and are being disposed of by a single order for the sake of convenience.2. The learned representatives on both sides made detailed submissions, written as well as oral, with regard to various grounds involved in the assessee's appeal for asst. yr, 1995-96 (ITA No. 1535/Ahd/l999) and requested that these submissions may be considered in respect of indentical grounds involved in assessee's appeal for asst. yr. 1994-95 (ITA No. 3216/Ahd/1997). We would, therefore, first take up the appeal for asst. yr. 1995-96 (ITA No. 1535/Ahd/1999).3. Ground No. 1 is against sustaining the disallowance of Rs. 35,000 under Rule 6D of the IT Rules, 1962. This ground is not pressed and is, therefore, dismissed. "The learned CIT(A) has erred in holding that the deduction claimed of Rs. 13,60,50,698 being payment for technical know-how fees is admissible only at 1/6th and not the full amount. The appel...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad
Reported in : (2004)90TTJ(Ahd.)1024
These are cross-appeals filed by the assessee as well as revenue against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals), dated 27-6-2004. Since facts and issues involved are common, these appeals have been heard and are being disposed of by a common order.The cross-appeals relate to the block assessment made by the assessing officer for the block period comprising of assessment years 1990-91 to 1999-2000, and further current period 1-4-1999 to 29-6-1999. At the outset, relevant facts having a bearing on the points in issue may be briefly set out. Search operations were conducted by the Income Tax authorities at the residential premises of Dr. Manjit Singh and Smt.Pammy Manjit Singh on 29-6-1999. Smt. Pammy Manjit Singh is trustee of the assessee-trust and is also principal of primary section of the school. Her husband, Dr. Manjit Singh, is administrator and principal of secondary and higher secondary sections of the school run by the trust at Piplod, Surat, Pursuant to searches carried out a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad
Reported in : (2005)279ITR41(Ahd.)
1. This is Assessee's appeal against the order of the CIT(A)dated 26-2-2004.2. Ground No. 2 challenging disallowance of miscellaneous expenditure is not pressed, hence dismissed. Ground No. 3 regarding interest is contended to be consequential in nature, which does not require our adjudication, that leaves Ground No. 1, which is as under: "I(a) The learned CIT(A)-VI has grievously erred in confirming depreciation claimed on goodwill for an amount of Rs. 1,89,375/- on misinterpretation of provision of Section 32 since the appellant has fulfilled all the requisites as mentioned in the statute. " 3. Brief facts are - The AO during the assessment proceedings noted that the assessee was a partner in M/s. Nodule Cast along with Shri J.B. Vyas, his father and one Shri O.A. Lokhandwala. The firm was dissolved and a sum of Rs. 15.13 lacs was paid as goodwill to Shri Lokhandwala. The aseessee during the assessment proceedings stated that in view of the provisions of Section 32 relevant from A.Y...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad
Reported in : (2005)97ITD248(Ahd.)
This is assessee's appeal against the order of the CIT (A), dated 26-2-2004.Ground No. 2 challenging disallowance of miscellaneous expenditure is not pressed, hence dismissed. Ground No. 3 regarding interest is contended to be consequential in nature, which does not require our adjudication that leaves Ground No. 1, which is as under: "I(a) The learned CIT (A)-VI has grievously erred in confirming depreciation claimed on goodwill for an amount of Rs. 1,89,375 on misinterpretation of provision of section 32 since the appellant has fulfilled all the requisites as mentioned in the statutes." Brief facts are - The assessing officer during the assessment proceedings noted that the assessee was a partner in M/s. Nodule Cast along with Shri J.B. Vyas, his father and one Shri O.A. Lokhandwala.The firm was dissolved and a sum of Rs. 15.15 lacs was paid as goodwill to Shri Lokhandwala. The assessee during the assessment proceedings stated that in view of the provisions of section 32 relevant fr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad
Reported in : (2002)81ITD553(Ahd.)
..... accordance with accountancy practice. accounting practice cannot override section 56 or any other provision of the act as was pointed by lord russel in the case of b.s.c. footwear ltd. [1970] 77 itr 857, 860 (ca), the income-tax ..... of that case are totally different. the assessee in that case had obtained lease of premises at bangalore for a period of 39 years on rent of rs. 1000 per month for first 15 years which was liable to be increased after a gap of ..... debentures is an instance where, although the assessee has incurred the liability to pay the discount in the year of issue of debentures, the payment is to secure a benefit over a number of years. there is a continuing benefit to the business of the company over the entire period. the liability should ..... and salary and wages expenses pertaining to jhagadia unit. the disallowance of expenditure to the tune of rs. 24,81,150 out of travelling expenses and rs. 29,36,363 out of salary & wages expenses pertaining to jhagadia unit ..... cost of acquisition of capital asset viz. long term leasehold rights is therefore not allowable under section 37. it will be relevant here to refer to some of the provisions which specifically provide for grant of deduction/amortization in relation to capital expenditure incurred for certain specified activities. section 35a specifically provides deduction in respect of any expenditure of a capital nature incurred on acquisition of patent rights or copyrights in the manner provided in that section. section .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad
Reported in : (2001)73TTJ(Ahd.)404
..... with the expansion of the existing business of the company can be claimed as deduction under section 36(1)(iii) of the act. he relied on the following decisions i (d) cit v. insotex (p) ltd. (1984) 39 ctr (kar) 172 : (1984) 150 itr 195 (kar); (e) cit v. shah theatres (p) ltd. (1987 ..... 1968) 69 itr 692 (sc); dalmia jain & co. ltd. v. cit (1971) 81 itr 754 (sc) as well as v. jagmohan rao v. cit (1970) 75 itr 373 (sc). the assessing officer held that the assessee has correctly treated this amount as capital expenditure in its books of account. the claim of ..... distorted picture of the profits of a particular year. issuing debentures is an instance where, although the assessee has incurred the liability to pay the discount in the year of issue of debentures, the payment is to secure a benefit over a number of years. there is a continuing benefit to the business of the company over the entire period. the liability should. therefore, be spread over the period of the debentures.held ..... cost of acquisition of capital asset viz., long-term leasehold rights is, therefore, not allowable under section 37. it will be relevant here to refer to some of the provisions which specifically provide for grant of deduction/amortization in relation to capital expenditure incurred for certain specified activities. section 35a specifically provides deduction in respect of any expenditure of a capital nature incurred on acquisition of patent rights or copyrights in the manner provided in that section. section .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad
1. This appeal is directed against the assessment order by the Dy. CIT, Ahmedabad under Section 158BD r/w Section 158BB(1) of the IT Act, 1961, on 29th Dec., 1997. 1. In law and in the facts as well as the circumstances of the appellant's case the order passed by the Dy. CIT(Asst.), S.R. 11, Ahmedabad under Section 158BD r/w Section 158BB(1) of the IT Act is bad in law and without jurisdiction. In passing this order the AO has failed to appreciate the following amongst others : (a) He ought to have appreciated that the appellant very specifically informed the AO vide her letter dt. 14th Oct., 1997, that she did not receive any notice under Section 158BC, of the IT Act and, therefore, the proceedings were ab initio void and without jurisdiction. (b) He has further failed to appreciate that the appellant had recruested in her letter dt. 14th Oct., 1997, that in case such notice was served she may be furnished a copy of such notice along with the copy of the acknowledgement which has not...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad
Reported in : (2002)74TTJ(Ahd.)507
This appeal is directed against the assessment order by the Deputy Commissioner Ahmedabad under section 158BD read with section 158BB(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on 29-12-1997.1. In law and in the facts as well as the circumstances of the appellant's case, the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner (Assessment), Senior Representative 11, Ahmedabad, under section 158BD read with section 158BB(1) of the Income Tax Act is bad in law and without jurisdiction. In passing this order the assessing officer has failed to appreciate the following amongst others : (a) He ought to have appreciated that the appellant very specifically informed the assessing officer vide her letter dated 14-10-1997, that she did not receive any notice under section 158BC, of the Income Tax Act and, therefore, the proceedings were ab initio void and without jurisdiction.(b) He has further failed to appreciate that the appellant had requested in her letter dated 14-10-1997, that in case such notice was served, s...
Tag this Judgment!