Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Agra
Reported in : (2008)116TTJAgra951
1. These are two appeals filed by the Revenue for asst. yr. 2001-02 against different assessees namely Shri Narsi Shah Sadh, Farrukhabad and Smt. Sheela Sadh, Farrukhabad. Identical issues are involved in these appeals. The orders appealed against are even dt. 9th March, 2005.2. The only legal issue involved in these appeals is as to whether unrealized portion of the export incentive issued by the Ministry of Commerce is eligible for deduction under Section 80HHC or not. In the case of Shri Narsi Shah Sadh an amount of Rs. 4,34,477 and in the case of Smt. Sheela Sadh an amount of Rs. 10,94,255 remained unrealized.These were held by learned AO to be not eligible but held by learned CIT(A) to be eligible, for deduction under Section 80HHC.3. At the very outset it was concurred by both the parties that the issue involved in these appeals now stands covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of B. Desraj v. CIT (2008) 7 DTR (SC) 54, a c...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Agra
Reported in : (2008)117TTJAgra433
1. The appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order of CIT(A) for the assessment year 2000-2001 and the cross objection has been filed by the assessee against the same order of ('IT(A). First, we decide the appeal of the Revenue.2. In ground No. 1, the Revenue is agitated on the ground that the CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 15,35,399/- on account of goods in transit.3. The Assessing Officer has discussed the facts of the case at page 1-2 of his order. The brief facts of the case are that the Assessing Officer, on perusal of profit and loss account, found that a debit of Rs. 15,35,399/- was made in the name of loss of goods in transit in profit and loss account. The assessee explained that the firm deals in nonferrous metal scrap and purchases are mostly made from abroad. The purchases of Brass Ash Dross was made from two companies of outside India for Rs. 15,35,399/- to whom payments were made on 02.05.1996 and 11.07.1996. The Assessing Officer had disallo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Agra
Reported in : (2008)117TTJAgra1
1. On a difference of opinion, the President, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, has referred the following questions for my opinion as Third Member, which read as under: 1. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, addition for unexplained investment in jewellery is maintainable? 2. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, addition for unexplained cash found in the search should be restored for verification? 2. The facts of the case on first point of difference are that on 16.02.2000 a search was conducted under Section 132 on the residence of the assessee. The Assessing Officer required the assessee to reconcile the material found and seized during the search operation. The assessee furnished the details of family members and jewellery disclosed during the Wealth Tax assessment for A.Y. 1985-86 as well as the certificate in support of the disclosure made in VDIS 1997. Addition of Rs. 24,303, Rs. 21,466, Rs. 43,753 and Rs. 7,575 aggregating to Rs. 97,097 were made by...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Agra
1. The above appeal by the assessee was heard by the Division Bench.The first ground of appeal of the assessee reads thus: (1) The initiation of proceedings Under Section 148 in the present case has been done at the behest and under the directions of C.I.T.(A). As such, the action Under Section 147/148 is bad in law rendering thereby the entire assessment as void ab initio, and hence non-est in law. It may kindly be quashed.2. In respect of the aforesaid ground of appeal, there was a difference of opinion between the Learned Accountant Member and the Learned Judicial Member and, therefore, the following question was referred for consideration by the Hon'ble Third Member: In the facts and circumstances of the case, is the action of the Ld. Accountant Member correct in quashing the assessment or is the action of the Judicial Member correct in upholding the assessment? The Hon'ble Third Member has concurred with the view of the Learned Accountant Member and has held that there was no exi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Agra
Reported in : (2008)116TTJAgra455
1. This appeal of the assessee is directed against the order passed by CIT(A)-II, Agra on 29th Oct., 1997 for the asst. yr. 1991-92.2. With the original memo of appeal, about 9 grounds of appeal were taken and thereafter, additional ground of appeal was also taken during the course of hearing. However, it is noted that the grounds of appeal were overlapping, therefore, concise grounds of appeal including the additional ground of appeal have been filed by the learned Counsel for the assessee. No objection has been raised by the learned Departmental Representative. Hence, the same has been accepted. In the concise grounds of appeal, the first ground taken is that initiation of proceedings under Section 148 in the present case has been done at the behest and under the directions of CIT(A). As such, the action under Section 147/148 is bad in law rendering thereby the entire assessment as void ab initio, and hence, non est in law, which may be quashed.3. The facts of the issue are that the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Agra
Reported in : (2008)116TTJAgra849
1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the Block Assessment Order dated 28.11.1997 of ACIT, Circle-1(1), Agra pertaining to Block Period 01.04.1986 to 03.11.1996.2. In the present appeal the assessee has raised as much as 8 grounds.However, at the time of hearing it was submitted by the learned A.R.that the assessee does not wish to press ground No. 1 & 8, as such, the same are dismissed as withdrawn. It was also submitted that ground No.6 & 7 are general in nature, accordingly, no adjudication is required thereon. The effective ground agitated by the assessee are grounds No.2 to 5 which read as under: (2) Because the addition of Rs. 19,03,027/- as investment in silver bullion is unjustified and illegal. Excepting approx 26 Kg., it did not belong to the assessee. Assessee's replies dated 6.1.97; 20.10.97 and 17.11.97 and the evidence have not been correctly appreciated. (3) Because the addition of Rs. 8,72,713/- as investment in silver ornaments is unjustified and ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Agra
Reported in : (2008)113ITD99Agra
1. On a difference of opinion, the President, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question for my opinion as Third Member, which read as under: In the facts and circumstances of the case, is the action of the Ld. Accountant Member correct in quashing the assessment or is the action of the Judicial Member correct in upholding the assessment? 2. The assessee company came into existence on 16.10.89. The Assessment year involved in this case is A.Y. 1991-92. As required Under Section 139 of the Act it was to file the return of income before a specified date. It did not file the same. The Assessing Officer issued notice Under Section 142(1) on 8.1.1992 to file it within 30 days. The assessee filed the return of income beyond the said 30 days on 31.12.1993 declaring net agriculture income of Rs. 1,42,567/-. The return of income is thus a belated return. The Assessing Officer proceeding on the said return of income passed the assessment order Under Section 143(3) on 30.3...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Agra
1. These appeals by assessee are against the order dated 03.02.2003 of learned CIT(Appeals), Ghaziabad. Identical modified grounds have been raised and the learned Departmental Representative having not objected to the modification, the same were admitted.2. Through various modified grounds, the assessee has challenged the impugned common order refusing to allow complete deduction Under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the I.T. Act by differentiating between the SLR and non-SLR fund even though the income earned by the assessee from interest on deposits etc. was attributable to the assessee's business.Likewise, the claim of loss has wrongfully been denied to be set off and carry forward which decision is stated to be contrary to the provisions of law.3. Briefly, the facts stated, are that the assessee carries business in terms of the main objects set out in its memorandum placed on record before the authorities below as well as before Tribunal the said was carried in conformity with Banking Re...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Agra
Reported in : (2008)110ITD421Agra
1. This appeal by the assessee for block period 01.04.89 to 16.02.2000 arises out of order of CIT(Appeals)-I, Agra.2. The First issue for consideration relates to determination of undisclosed income of Rs. 1,00,000/- as against nil shown by the assessee. The facts of the case-as apparent from records are that search was carried out in the case of Shri Pankaj Agarwal, the husband of the assessee on 16.02.2000. During the course of search, a pronote for Rs. 1,20,000/- made issued by M/s Kuntals was found from the premises of Shri Pankaj Agarwal. Locker in the name of Smt. Renu Agarwal, the assessee was also searched. No incriminating material was found in the said locker. The assessee filed return of income on 20^th June, 2000. The assessee as evident from assessment order is a regular assessee from the assessment year 1990-91 onwards and has been filing the returns of income regularly. Notice Under Section 158BC was issued on 10.01.2001 and the return of income was filed for the block ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Agra
Reported in : (2007)108ITD115Agra
1. These are three appeals - two of which are filed by the Revenue - one for the assessment year 1998-99 and other for the assessment year 1999-2000 and third, i.e., ITA No. 02/Agr./2003 is filed by the assessee for the assessment year 1998-99. Since all the three appeals relate to the inter-connected issues, we take them together for the sake of convenience.2. In this appeal, the assessee has mainly raised grounds against re-opening of assessment Under Section 147/148 and against confirming of an addition of Rs. 6,00000/- towards bogus purchases from M/s. Saraf Medicinal Botanical Garden. The other issues relate to confirmation of initiating penalty proceedings Under Section 271(1)(c) and charging of interest Under Section 234A & 234B. The grounds raised by the assessee read as under: 1.1. That the proceedings Under Section 147 are bad in law and facts having been initiated on suspicion and without application of mind. 1.2. That the proceedings Under Section 147/148 are without j...
Tag this Judgment!