Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Agra
Reported in : (2000)68TTJAgra586
These two cross- appeals-one by the assessee and the other by revenue arises out of order dated 16-12-1990, recorded by the Commissioner (Appeals). Both the appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by a common order for the sake of convenience.Ground Nos. 1 to 3 of assessee's appeal and ground No. 4 raised by the revenue relate to disallowance of Rs. 71,806 claimed by the assessee as expenditure incurred on transit home in the factory premises and Rs. 20,000 disallowed by assessing officer on account of the cost of electricity, water, gas, etc. in the guest house which was restricted to Rs. 12,000. Vide para 27 of the assessment order the assessing officer noted that assessee had claimed Rs. 79,936 on account of maintenance of transit house Rs., 4,390 as depreciation and Rs. 10,803 recovered from persons using transit house. The assessing officer also noted that expenses disclosed above did not cover all the expenses.Ultimately he disallowed Rs. 25,000 on ad hoc basis out...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Agra
1. These two cross-appeals - one by the assessee and the other by Revenue arises out of order dt. 16th December, 1990, recorded by the CIT(A). Both the appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by a common order for the sake of convenience.2. Ground Nos. 1 to 3 of assessee's appeal and ground No. 4 raised by the Revenue relate to disallowance of Rs. 71,806 claimed by the assessee as expenditure incurred on transit home in the factory premises and Rs. 20,000 disallowed by AO on account of the cost of electricity, water, gas, etc. in the guest house which was restricted to Rs. 12,000. Vide para 27 of the assessment order the AO noted that assessee had claimed Rs. 79,936 on account of maintenance of transit house Rs., 4,390 as depreciation and Rs. 10,803 recovered from persons using transit house. The AO also noted that expenses disclosed above did not cover all the expenses. Ultimately he disallowed Rs. 25,000 on ad hoc basis out of electricity expenses, water charges and co...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Agra
Reported in : (2001)72TTJAgra189
These two appeals of the assessee are directed against common order dated 30-3-1995, recorded by the Commissioner (Appeals)-I, Agra, by which penalties imposed by the assessing officer (hereinafter referred to as the assessing officer) under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for assessment years 1983-84 and 1984-85 were confirmed in part.Facts, relevant in both the appeals, are identical. It may be seen that assessee filed return of income for assessment year 1983-84 showing income from commission earned by booking goods for transportation. A search and seizure operation took place on 5-1-1983, at the business premises of the assessee-firm and at the residence of partners in which alleged incriminating documents were found and seized. The assessing officer proceeded to examine the source of income of the assessee and first head was "Income from commission". On the basis of serial No. 13 of seizure memo, the assessing officer noted that said paper was from April, 1982, to ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Agra
1. These two appeals of the assessee are directed against common order dated 30-3-1995 recorded by the CIT(A)-I, Agra by which penalties imposed by the Assessing Officer ('AO' in short) under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for assessment years 1983-84 and 1984-85 were confirmed in part.2. Facts, relevant in both the appeals, are identical. It may be seen that assessee filed return of income for assessment year 1983-84 showing income from commission earned by booking goods for transportation. A search and seizure operation took place on 5-1-1983 at the business premises of the assessee-firm and at the residence of partners in which alleged incriminating documents were found and seized. The Assessing Officer proceeded to examine the source of income of the assessee and first head was "Income from commission". On the basis of Serial No. 13 of seizure memo, the Assessing Officer noted that said paper was from April 1982 to March 1983 and on the last page assessee had mentio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Agra
Reported in : (1999)65TTJAgra338
These five appeals of the Revenue were heard together as these involve common assessee and common issues are involved.2. The assessee, a doctor by profession and politician was subject of search operation carried out at his house and residential premises, on 13th Sept., 1985, under section 132(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the AcC). During search operation large number of incriminating documents were found. It appears that Sr. No.14 of "G" Annexure to Panchnama prepared at the residence of the assessee was a note book which contained receipt of cash and expenditure on electioneering during the period 12th June, 1977 to 30th June, 1977. As per entry at p. 2 from the end of the book, it was noted by the assessing officer that total election expenditure was Rs. 1,24,500. The said amount was added to the assessee's income as unexplained expenditure in the order under S. 132(5) of the Act for assessment year 1978-79. During assessment proceedings for assessmen...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Agra
Reported in : (1999)65TTJAgra458
These cross-appeals one by the assessee and the other by the Revenue are directed against the order dated 27-3-1992, for assessment year 1989-90.The first ground raised by the assessee relates to confirmation of disallowance of Rs. 20,000 made by the assessing officer out of legal expenses by invoking the provisions of s. 40A(12) of Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to "the Act). At the time of hearing the learned counsel for the assessee did not press this ground. Hence ground No. 1 is rejected, as not pressed.Ground No. 2 relates to confirmation of an addition of Rs. 40,000 made by the assessing officer on account of alleged sale of leather scrap.The assessee derives income from manufacture and sale of shoes and shoe-uppers. The assessing officer in para 10 of the assessment order observed that the manufacturing process carried out by the assessee results in generation of leather scrap. The assessee has neither shown any sales nor closing stock of leather scrap. The assessi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Agra
1. These cross-appeals one by the assessee and the other by the Revenue are directed against the order dt. 27th March, 1992, for asst. yr.1989-90.3. The first ground raised by the assessee relates to confirmation of disallowance of Rs. 20,000 made by the AO out of legal expenses by invoking the provisions of s. 40A(12) of IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to "the Act"). At the time of hearing the learned counsel for the assessee did not press this ground. Hence ground No. 1 is rejected, as not pressed.4. Ground No. 2 relates to confirmation of an addition of Rs. 40,000 made by the AO on account of alleged sale of leather scrap. The assessee derives income from manufacture and sale of shoes and shoe-uppers. The AO in para 10 of the assessment order observed that the manufacturing process carried out by the assessee results in generation of leather scrap. The assessee has neither shown any sales nor closing stock of leather scrap. The AO following similar additions made in preceding ye...
Tag this Judgment!